[linux-elitists] LGPL compliance

Stephen Williams sdw at lig.net
Fri Mar 13 09:54:12 PDT 2009


Dave Crossland wrote:
> 2009/3/13 Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>:
>   
>> A quick question: I caught some local code monkeys using LGPL
>> licensed code about to be shipped in a proprietary product.
>> In order to assure we're compliant, do we have
>> to isolate the LGPL code into a dynamically linked library,
>> or is it enough to use a statically linked library using
>> unmodified LGPL code and ship the full source of the LGPL code
>> and the license along with it without disclosing the proprietary
>> code statically linked to it? IANAL, so I don't exactly know what
>> qualifies as a derivative work.
>>     
>
> If it is statically linked, and I buy your product, and I recompile
> the LGPL code with some new features, can I still use your product
> with my new code?
>
> If not, you break the LGPL.
>   
Or ship, in addition to the executable, the application par-linked so 
that it could be linked with a newly compiled version of the LGPL code.  
It is the ability to replace the code that is important, not the dynamic 
linking per se.

Stephen



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list