Re: the awakening, license changes and so on...

Fabian Franz writes:
> [summary: LGPL vs. GPL]
> 
> I agree that LGPL is better for libraries.
> 
> I think GNU & RMS had a reason to create it.
> 
> And those are the same people, that created GPL.
> 
> Think about it!

Well, it's called Lesser GPL for a reason now:

http://www.fsf.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html

There is no such thing as a "better" license for libraries.  You just
have to decide what you want to achieve, i.e. if you want to allow
proprietary software to link against it or not.

> Where is the difference between a _bad_ company using gcc and other software 
> to produce DRM- / other bad Software or a Software that uses LGPLed 
> libraries?
> 
> I see no difference. If someone is evil, they'll always find a way.

There is a difference between a specific and a general purpose tool.
An electrical circuit is not made with a certain intent, a TCPA
enabled motherboard is.

> Btw: Which advantage would GPL have over LGPL for others?

As said above, it depends what you want, if you make a library GPL, it
can only be used by free software and this strengthens free sw.

Diego