[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Copyright/licensing action plan + a sample [PATCH]

From: Anthony W. Youngman
Subject: Re: Copyright/licensing action plan + a sample [PATCH]
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:49:18 +0100
User-agent: Turnpike/6.07-M (<UNV6T1BYPTSck3mvQWd+2+6Mnv>)

In message <address@hidden>, Reinhold Kainhofer <address@hidden> writes
The LGPLv3 also includes the patents clause and the anti-DRM clause, which
both add additional restrictions, which the GPLv2 does not have.

On the other hand, all lilypond contributors -- by putting their code under
GPLv2only -- explicitly say that they do not agree to any additional

Oops - haven't you got that backwards? If they put it under v2 ONLY, aren't they saying they don't agree to any additional FREEDOMS

Thus lilypond can't link to any (L)GPLv3 library, which would add additional

such as allowing it to be distributed under v3?

(Yes I know I'm being a pedant! But that's why I think demanding contributors use v2 *only* is a bad idea. You're saying they can't grant *more* *freedom* (if that's what they want).)

Anthony W. Youngman - address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]