From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20623 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2003 12:45:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact pthreads-win32-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: pthreads-win32-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20519 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2003 12:45:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murray.nsw.cmis.CSIRO.AU) (130.155.16.3) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Oct 2003 12:45:13 -0000 Received: from pride.nsw.cmis.CSIRO.AU (pride.nsw.cmis.CSIRO.AU [130.155.16.4]) by murray.nsw.cmis.CSIRO.AU (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA246D8 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:45:11 +1000 (EST) To: pthreads-win32@sources.redhat.com Subject: License wars X-URL: http://www.cmis.csiro.au/Hugues.Talbot Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:45:00 -0000 From: Hugues Talbot Message-Id: <20031020124511.BA246D8@murray.nsw.cmis.CSIRO.AU> X-SW-Source: 2003/txt/msg00111.txt.bz2 Dear Alexander, The LGPL's intention is to let people use Free software into proprietary code as long as they go through some slightly annoying hoops, while ensuring that the Free software itself remains Free. I think this is what we want (in broad terms). Now I've scanned through the CPL and it does not seem to protect the Free software in any way that is clearly spelled. The LGPL says that if you modify the original Free software then your modification must also be Free. The CPL does not spell what a derivative work is. Is it anyone's guess ? do you have to be a copyright laywer to have some opinion on this? You may not agree with the LGPL definition of a derivative work but at least it's there. I don't want to go into any kind of religious war on licenses, but the (L)GPL has been enforced several times by the FSF, so far no one has dared or found it worthwhile to go to court, maybe it is `idiotic' in your own words but it seems to be somewhat effective. The FSF has stated several times that they would help anyone wishing to enforce the (L)GPL on their own software. Can we expect the same service from IBM, should someone infringe on the CPL? The point of a Free Software license is to grand some rights and have some protection. The CPL does the first part all right, I'm not sure about the second, sorry. -------- Hugues Talbot, CSIRO Mathematical & Information Sciences Locked Bag 17, Building E6B, Macquarie University North Ryde NSW 2113 Australia Ph: 61 2 9325 3208 Fax: 61 2 9325 3200 Verbing weirds language -- Calvin