LGPL Section 5 & 6

[Rod Dixon]

The initial clause of Section 5 of the LGPL appears to exclude from the
scope of its provisions any work that "uses the Library," but that is not,
itself, a derivative of the library. If, however, a derivative work is at
issue, then section 6 sets forth conditions that, if complied with, would
permit distribution "under terms of your choice" as long as those terms
include a provision permitting modification of the licensor's work by the
licensee for the licensee's "own use" including reverse engineering for
debugging. (BTW, the holiday weekend may preclude much discussion on this.
You may want to consider raising your question next week, if more responses
are not forthcoming.)

Rod

Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
www.cyberspaces.org
rod at cyberspaces.org

My papers on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) are available
through the
following url: http://papers.ssrn.com/author=240132




> Hello,
>     I have a query regarding the LGPL  ( I hope I am posting in the =
> appropriate forum ).=20
>     Section 5 mentions that if the object code of the software includes =
> object code of the LGPL library, then it is bound under Section 6, "As =
> an exception to the Sections above, you may also combine or link a "work =
> that uses the Library" with the Library to produce a work containing =
> portions of the Library, and distribute that work under terms of your =
> choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the =
> customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such =
> modifications."
>
>     This seems to place restrictions on the distribution mechanism of =
> commercial products which only "use" an open source LGPL library. As I =
> understand - it can only be distributed if the binary code is kept =
> seperately, and the software links to it at run time. Is this =
> intepretation correct ?
>
>     If yes, then I was looking for other licenses which safeguard open =
> source code and yet give the necessary flexibility to commercial =
> entities when it comes to "using" libraries. Apache and BSD licenses =
> seemed to be have no safeguards but a lot of flexibility.
>    =20
>     I would appreciate any advice in this regard.
>     Thank you very much in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Somik
>
> --
> license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
>

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3