GPL with the Classpath exception - clarification needed

Roger Fujii rmf at
Thu Mar 26 11:09:00 UTC 2009

Wilson, Andrew wrote:
> Philippe Verdy [mailto:verdy_p at] wrote:
>> But remember that we were speaking about Java when speaking about the
>> Classpath exclusion. Where does the LGPL affect Java-written libraries so
>> that it would not work or would render an application using it fully GPL
>> licenced with all its requirements?
> OK. If you derive a Java class from a base class which is LGPL licensed,
> under what rationale do you claim your derived class is not also a
> derivative work under copyright, and is not subject to LGPL?
This came up in the long past.  On reading the LGPL, you are correct that
the text AND FSF's definition of 'derived' means if you use the class, 
it must be
LGPL also.   However, I think my obstinance on the matter got FSF to publish

Given what is said there, "work based on" in the LGPL cannot mean the 
same thing
as that phrase used in the GPL, but for some reason, this oversight 
doesn't seem to
bother too many people.


More information about the License-discuss mailing list