[squeak-dev] Re: On the swazoo list
jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com
Wed Mar 26 20:58:59 UTC 2008
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu.org> wrote:
> >>> Because he is trying to appeal to a broader audience than appeals to
> >>> LGPL within the Squeak community.
> > Paolo> Because the Squeak community does not want to read licenses and prefers to
> > Paolo> remain hostage of FUD.
> > I'm not sure at this point where the greater FUD lies.
> > Do you agree that LPGL is *more* restrictive than MIT?
> Of course.
> I don't mean FUD as in "FUD talk", but the Squeak community's own fears,
> uncertainties and doubts about the applicability of the LGPL.
These fears, uncertainties and doubts are quite reasonable. As
Andreas mentioned  and I alluded to , in the U.S. (at least) you
can not be sure how a seemingly clear license (much less a complex
one, like the LGPL) will actually be applied until it actually is. In
court. Your personal (and unqualified!) interpretation means
absolutely nothing, so I would appreciate it if you would stop talking
as if this is somehow a solved issue. You could cause some
unsuspecting individual to put themselves at risk of litigation.
More information about the Squeak-dev