What's the difference between OSL and LGPL?

[Remco]

That document says:
"That independent source code need not be disclosed. In this respect,
OSL 3.0 is more like LGPL than GPL in its effect, although it
accomplishes that with far fewer words and far less uncertainty."

This is the only mention of the LGPL, and it says it looks like LGPL.
The document makes me believe it is essentially the same license, only
more clear; as if it's LGPL v4, but without the compatibility.

Both the LGPL and the OSL do the following things:
* Allow modification and translation of the code if it is released
under the same license.
* Allow to be linked with proprietary software.
* Require a patent grant from the authors
* Disclaim warranty and liability.

As far as I can see, those are the important parts of the license.
Copyright is handled, patents are handled, trademark is ignored.

A few differences with the LGPL:
* The OSL requires a reasonable effort to get assent from the user.
* The OSL doesn't give an exception for use inside a company, whereas
it doesn't count as distribution with the LGPL.
* The OSL doesn't restrict distribution on consumer electronics that
prevent modification by the user.

That's what I could come up with. Did I miss something major?

Remco

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:31 AM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com> wrote:
> Read the explanation of the OSL. It differs from the LGPL. See the link at
> the bottom of this: http://opensource.org/licenses/osl-3.0.php
>
> /Larry