LGPL is Viral for Java

carlfish writes "According to this post to POI-dev, Dave Turner (Mr License) of the FSF has decreed that the steps required to use an LGPL'd Java library will actually infect client code with substantial GNU-ness via Section 6 of the LGPL. (The "Lesser" GPL is supposed to protect only the Library, without infecting code using the library) This, as you might imagine, puts a few LGPL Java projects that previously thought they were embeddable without being viral in a bit of a bind. Various weblogs have further coverage." Update: 07/18 02:44 GMT by CN : The FSF's Executive Director, Brad Kuhn adds "LGPL's S. 6 allows you to make new works that link with the LGPL'ed code, and license them any way you see fit. Only the LGPL'ed code itself must remain Free. Such 'client code' can even be proprietary; it need not be LGPL'ed."

GPL model

[jinglecat]

I know a way they can handle their GPL model..

Just ask SCO!

"If it is not OUR's then it must be Viral"

Re:Huh?

[jedidiah]

I can see how you could be confused since commercial licensing issues are only relevant to those that don't live in momma's basement.

Re:How about not using the word `viral'?

[jinglecat]

It does have negative attributes to it.. And I for one, don't like the term because when I read viral...

... I subconsciously think Virile.

Nasty habit, really.

Re:The GPL is like a Vaccine

[pstreck]

It all depends on which side of the coin you're looking at. Commercial software venders see the GPL'ed code as a risk to their IP. Alas, viral is a bad word to describe this any ways. Recursive licensing sounds better :)

Viral...

[en4ca]

Did anyone else read this as LGPL is Vital for Java. Guess thats what happens when you're half asleep

The LGPL and End to Sexism

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, I hated watching PGA golf [pga.com] back in the 1950s, when men were getting all the attention. Fortunately, the LPGA [lpga.com] came along, and before you knew it, we all were treated to the likes of Nancy Lopez, and today, Annika Sorenstam.

In regard to open source software, I've been feeling the same way over the past decade, watching the men sponsored by the GPL get all the coverage. It's great to at long last see the LGPL get some attention too. I'm sure it won't be too long before the Ladies of the GPL start receiving the attention that has been denied for too long.

Solution....

[theendlessnow]

Run Windows Update.... it now has an antivirus patch which removes all GPL and LGPL software from your system. Ain't that nice and tidy!!

Re:Yes, that David Turner

[donutello]

you can find our phone number on our web page by searching for "s" on Google and clicking "I Feel Lucky."


It's almost scary how non-obvious that is.

ouch... my head is spinning

[archen]

You know all this license stuff is way to much for a simple coder like me. I can now see where the BSD license is coming from:

"Here, just take the god damn code. If it breaks I don't care!"

Re:Yes, that David Turner

[axxackall]

I'd like to know how they arranged that!

Google used some GPL code right behind the button "I am feeling lucky". So the button, using the GPL code, is infexted and behave accordingly. It's a perfect illustration that the viral nature of GPL is not bad - it's rather very useful.

we gotta break FSF

[Rock Ridge]

There is the Free Software Foundation. When will we have a Freer Software Foundation? Then when will we have the Freest Software Foundation? Rise up! Revolt! Distribute gcc, et al., with the GPL removed. Go ahead!

Re:Yes, that David Turner

[prizog]

With a hex editor.

The LGPL isn't the GPL. If you want the GPL, you know where to find it.