<disclaimer>
I don't really know what I'm talking about, apart from my
personal experiences with writing and using LGPLed code with closed
embedded systems and low-level graphics hardware. This is just what I know
and believe, none of it is guaranteed to be technically or legally correct
:) </disclaimer>
> The LGPL makes no special exemption for 'part of the operating system'.
Okay, this is true, I apologise. I misread the qualifier in the LGPL
license that this exception only applies to 'a work that uses the
library'.
Section 6:
For an executable, the required form of the "work that uses the Library"
must include any data and utility programs needed for reproducing the
executable from it. However, as a special exception, the materials to be
distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in
either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel,
and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless
that component itself accompanies the executable.
> Only the GPL does (the reasons for this was discussed earlier), but that
> exemption only allows linking against such libraries, not embedding NDA-ed
> code straight into Wine, which I was talking about. As mentioned before, I
> agree that this hardly matters in most "practical" cases, but there are
> always the cases neither you nor I could anticipate.
This is true. However there is a valid exception that you can add
callbacks in libraries that need to access special abilities as long as
they operate in accordance with section 2D.
What I'm trying to say, is that it's not an issue at the moment. If it
becomes an issue in the future, for the good of WINE itself, I'm sure a
license exemption can be made.
There may be things the LGPL hinders in terms of legal usage. For example,
maybe you sign an NDA with Safedisk to get details of the checks it makes
against Windows, so you can implement conditions to allow that check to
succeed. In time, no doubt WINE will eventually mature enough that
those functions are a native part of the tree.
The problem is that using ANY nda'ed code to begin with creates the one
nightmare of open source programmers - concept contamination. If you sign
an NDA with a driver maker to get the source code required to add
low-level hooks, it's likely that in the open part of the code some
concepts will appear which may seem derived from the concepts in the
closed code. This of course presents a great risk.
So while using NDAed or closed code/specifications may be conventient in
many cases, it's not always the RIGHT things to do. So until a situation
evolves where WINE may need to use such codefor it's survival, it's not an
issue for the project.
Now let's play the devils advocate and say that "Well, maybe not for WINE
itself, but what about the companies that use WINE!". Obviously for a
company the right thing to do is develop a product, nurture a market, and
make enough money to feed employees. (In these post .com days, the ferarri
is optional). This is where decent cooperation comes in between a company
and the community. The LGPL license allows several methods of including
code under strict conditions. This can range from callbacks, to placing a
wrapper around a function, subclassing, or the extreme of adding a
specific exemption to the license (which must be done carefully, to ensure
that the change only provides more FREEDOM of use, and doesn't add more
restrictions on distribution/use, as defined in section 10 of the LGPL)
But my fingers are sore, so let me end on this one statement.
There is no license everyone will agree on. Some licenses protect totally
the rights of the individual authors, others the big companies. Some try
to ballance both. But in the end of the day, there will always be
technical and moral incompatabilities with the ideals of the individual.
The best we can all do is try and get along, and make sacrifices in the
spirit of cooperation and goodwill.
</semi-rant>
</philosophy>
</pseudo-html>
- Ender
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.