[f-cpu] about LGPL

[Yann Guidon <whygee@f-cpu.org>]

hi,

i found a link on linuxfr about the "problems" caused by GNU licences :
http://news.linuxprogramming.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-16-002-06-LT

skip the technical part about the new glibc and you'll find
these selected snippets.

"
   The most remarkable thing is that Stallman was all for this despite
   the clear motivation of commercialization.  The reason: he finally got
   the provocative changes he made to the license through.  In case you
   forgot or haven't heard, here's an excerpt:

         [...] For example, permission to use the GNU C Library in non-free
         programs enables many more people to use the whole GNU operating
         system, as well as its variant, the GNU/Linux operating system.

   This $&%$& demands everything to be labeled in a way which credits him
   and he does not stop before making completely wrong statements like
   "its variant".  I find this completely unacceptable and can assure
   everybody that I consider none of the code I contributed to glibc
   (which is quite a lot) to be as part of the GNU project and so a major
   part of what Stallman claims credit for is simply going away.

   This part has a morale, too, and it is almost the same: don't trust
   this person.  Read the licenses carefully and rip out parts which give
   Stallman any possibility to influence your future.  Phrases like

         [...] GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free
         Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of the License, or (at your
         option) any later version.

   just invites him to screw you when it pleases him.  Rip out the "any
   later version" part and make your own decisions when to use a
   different license since otherwise he can potentially do you or your
   work harm.
"

and

"
   The LGPL 2.1 issue was declared political and therefore in scope of
   the SC.  I didn't feel this was reason enough to leave the project for
   good so I tolerated the changes.  Especially since I didn't realize
   the mistake with the wording of the copyright statements which allow
   applying later license versions before.
"

one can discuss endlessly about the real reasons of the problems :
is the author biased by his work at Red Hat or is RMS machiavelic ?

however i think that the licence issue is still not closed.
this text speaks about the LGPL in embarassing terms, but we have
to verify that the same potential problems are not present in the GPL
and the GFDL.

After all : remember that the Freedom project has not started as
belonging to the GNU project.
I cannot start the work to design a new licence. We tried before and
we did not succeed. However a new 'Free HW' licence is required to clear
some problems that Nicolas Boulay points to, for example.

help.

WHYGEE
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu       in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/