Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Just so I understand, you don't think the GPL should exist or be used, and should be replaced by the LGPL, correct?



Rather, I think the difference between them hinges on use restrictions. They should both be replaced by a license which is simply silent on the issue: a license which simply forbids the redistribution of the Work in such a way that it is combined into a single image with incompatibly-licensed works, but permits every conceivable use.

By the way, I think even static linking is fair, if the program is distributed as separate images, and only linked as a part of use. (Which is why the LGPL is silly.)

That is to say, suppose we have a "Libbash" library version of Bash. I could ship my program such that when the user installs it and runs its wrapper program, it statically links itself prior to execution. If it finds a "libbash.a" on the system, then it statically links that. Otherwise it falls back on linking to its own "libbash-stub.a" which works by spawning a process. Since I didn't redistribute any part of Bash, I cannot possibly be infringing on any copyright.

According the LGPL (if that were the license), I would be infringing because of the specific linking technology that is identifiable as "static". (Though it is de facto dynamic by being delayed as long as possible, happening on the user's target machine).

Yet note how the user has full rights over "libbash.a". The user can update to a new version or make local modifications, and rebuild this. When the user runs my program, it will notice there is a newer "libbash.a" and re-run the static linking steps.


From the point of view of copyright, I think this scenario may not have the results you want: the user is effectively preparing a derivative work. In fact, your wrapper is.

Preparing a derivative work is an exclusive right of the copyright holder, meaning they can prevent it or place conditions on it. It's not only distribution.

Now, no one (afaik) in the free/open software communities will focus on the user here, they may focus on the wrapper/Libbash writer: if the work you're creating is a derivative work, then it is within the scope of copyright of the parts.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: