GPL and LGPL question

Pat St. Jean psj at
Tue May 18 22:05:16 UTC 1999

On Tue, 18 May 1999, Bruce Perens wrote:

>You are confusing aggregation with derivation. Agggregation is when you put
>two separate programs on the same CD. That is what OSD #9 addresses.
>Derivation is when you incorporate someone else's work into your own new
>work. That is what the GPL addresses.

You're right, I stand corrected.  But that opens up another problem:

I've got a program foo.  I want program foo to do bar.  I download a GPL'd
library quux that does bar.  I incorporate it into my program foo.  By the
terms of the GPL, foo must now be distributed under the GPL (2b of the
GPL).  Isn't that in conflict with #3, which says "...must allow them to
be distributed..."?

>> Also, how does OSD part 3 protect the author of the code from what I
>> think (and this IS just MY _OPINION_) are malicious clauses in other
>> licenses, specifically the LGPL, clause 3.  A case can also be made that
>> LGPL clause 3 is in conflict with OSD part 7, depending on which legal
>> dictionary you're reading.
>It's not obvious what you are seeing here. Tell me how you come to these
>conclusions, please.

What I'm getting at is that #7 says that one cannot require that an
additional license be executed between parties.  LGPL clause 3 allows
anyone, without the consent of the owner of the code, to change the
licsensing of the code.

It also seems to violate OSD #3 in that if someone decides to exercise
LGPL clause 3, they cannot be distributed under the same terms as the
license of the origional software (LGPL).


Patrick St. Jean              '97 XLH 883                psj at
Programmer & Systems Administrator                    +1 713-977-4177 x115
Larson Software Technology              

More information about the License-discuss mailing list