Clarification on my call for license change
degs at giantblob.com
Sun Feb 17 13:33:41 CST 2002
Since copyright applies to expression and not algorhyms, I don't see how this
'brain pollution' argument applies unless the programmer concerned has a
On Sunday 17 February 2002 11:23, David Laight wrote:
> > I haven't contributed any code so I will not state my opinion (but you
> > can guess that) hehe.
> Ah, but if I read the issues correctly, that isn't the problem!
> If the LGPL license were in force it would matter whether you
> had READ any of the code.
> If you see a small fragment of code in LGPL source (even something
> relatively trivial like some odd list handling routine) and later
> write the same (or very similar) code in some commercial software,
> the LGPL license might be construed to apply to the entire
> commercial software product - there is no way this is acceptable.
More information about the wine-devel