Wine license change

[Sean Farley]

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002 15:26, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Douglas Ridgway wrote:
>
> >   * LGPL may well be legal gibberish. Be sure to consult non-FSF lawyers
> > as well as talking to the FSF. This is problematic because a gibberish
> > license will discourage use. I know that I would be cautious linking
> > source with a value of 100M against something LGPL, if I was worried about
> > the risk that a judge might decide that by so doing I'd created a derived
> > work, and thus had gnuified my entire source.
>
> This is so much FUD that even Microsoft would blush. If this would even be
> a _possibility_, no comercial company would release products on Linux,
> since they most likely link against glibc. I assure you the Oracle DB is
> worth more than 100M...

The lawyer currently contacted works for the FSF.  Of course he thinks
the LGPL is suitable.  Contacting an outside (non-affiliated) lawyer is
a wise thing to do.

Since the LGPL has not been taken to court, no legal precedence for it
has been set.  Has something happened recently to change this?

Sean
--------------
scf at farley.org