Jim,

James Robertson wrote:

> You can want to not worry about licenses all you want - but when a 
> lawyer comes knocking at your door with a lawsuit, you might feel 
> differently.  I'm not going to pretend to understand all the issues 
> surrounding the GPL and the LGPL; I don't.  However, I can tell you that 
> corporate entities take license issues very, very seriously.
> 
> Deciding to ignore a license could easily cost you a sale.

I didn't say to ignore license issues, no, I just said to listen to FSF 
  responses which are clearly more competent than most of us and to 
treat their opinion by spirit, not by letter.

And just for intermezzo, not whole world has the same judiciary 
practice, many parts have much more up-to-the-ground way to solve such 
disputes and for those parts the FSF answer is more than adequate, IMO.

Janko



> On Feb 3, 2008, at 12:09 PM, Janko Mivšek wrote:
> 
>> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>
>>> Paolo> This is exactly what the FSF did *not* say.  They said:
>>>>> we see no problem with people
>>>>> studying LGPLed code in order to write a different implementation that
>>>>> does the same thing.  We give people the source, enabling them to 
>>>>> study
>>>>> it, without requiring them to accept any license.  The LGPL doesn't 
>>>>> have
>>>>> any requirements for people writing an independent implementation, and
>>>>> that's because it has no teeth it could use to enforce such those
>>>>> requirements.
>>> And where is the formal document amending the LGPL to permit this?
>>> "derived work" is a broad term, and the FSF must specifically waive 
>>> its rights
>>> to that.  If I *look* at GNU code, then write something similar, that is
>>> arguably "derived work", and therefore subject to GNU licensing.
>>> I don't see that anything has changed, except that we have an 
>>> "understanding"
>>> that is not legally binding.
>>> Let's make it legally binding, and then (only then!) has something 
>>> changed.
>>> Until then, *DO NOT LOOK AT GST*.
>>
>> Randal, please! First, why the heck we as Smalltalkers need to obey by 
>> the word that damn licenses if even FSF hinted clear enough, that it 
>> should be treated LGPL by the spirit, that is by intent and meaning of 
>> the license. And this one is clear enough for me from the FSF answers. 
>> So, Randal, if you'd like help us Smalltalkers, what I believe is your 
>> honest intent, better let us help cooperate without such bloody 
>> lawyer's obstacles.
>>
>>
>> Janko
>>
>>
>>
>> --Janko Mivšek
>> AIDA/Web
>> Smalltalk Web Application Server
>> http://www.aidaweb.si
>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si