[cairo] LGPL, MPL and "hidden extensions"
carol at gimp.org
Fri Aug 13 22:56:18 PDT 2004
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 05:17:47PM -0400, Mike Shaver wrote:
> (I apologize for not continuing the thread; I didn't receive James'
> reply due to my flailings to get subscribed, so I'm pasting .)
> James Henstridge wrote:
> > Unless I'm mistaken though, it would give people the ability to
> > distribute a modified version of cairo and not release the changes to
> > the library itself (since the MPL doesn't require you to release changes
> > in new source files in the derivative work). This is gives a lot less
> > protection than the LGPL. Am I missing anything here?
> We discussed these "mysecret.c" issues in great detail when we were
> designing the MPL, and I think the consensus was that the MPL's
> protection against someone who wants to keep their extension private
> is no weaker than the LGPL's. (It might happen more with the MPL than
> with the LGPL, theoretically, because I think most corporate lawyers
> are more comfortable letting people touch MPL'd code than LGPL'd, but
> that's a different axis of distinction entirely. =) )
i bet you could save a lot of money by firing the lawyers. maybe pay
your code people and your booth babes better :)
how much fun did you have with the lawyers anyways. even shakespeare
thought it best to kill lawyers than listen to them.
if the software is free free free there is no need for lawyers and more
money can be passed around to contributers instead.
remember, we are talking about people being able to control pixels on
their computer. they already bought the tool. it is like worrying
about the part of the hammer that hits the nail, even though the whole
tool has already been bought.
question. did anyone ask the lawyer how to get volunteers involved when
a group protects themselves from that which the best are interested in?
thank goodness for the cairopractors!
More information about the cairo