adding restrictive terms to LGPL (was: RE: GNU GPL can't force payment?)

[Wilson, Andrew]

Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:

>> Being in the academic sphere on a supporting role, I can tell you they
>> meant the first interpretation. "we distribute the software under the
>> terms of the LGPL with the additional restriction that it may only be
>> used for academic purposes".
>
> I completely agree that this is what they meant, but the question is not
> what they meant, but how a lawyer could successfully convince a judge to
> interpret it.

My non-lawyer guess is a judge would read LGPL (either version) as not allowing
additional  restrictive terms -- period.  Also note that a restriction to
academic use only discriminates by field of use and violates the OSD.  Altogether,
LGPL+restriction does not look like a valid or useful form of
open source license.

Why not just use GPL if you want to share your code for research or
free SW applications?  If your university
business office wants a way to commercialize your software,
explain dual licensing a la MySQL.

Andy Wilson
Intel open source technology center