Picking a license

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Fri, 14 May 2010 06:42:31 -0700, Ed Keith wrote:

> I am not a lawyer, but as I understand the LGPL, If I give someone
> something that used any LGPLed code I must give them the ability to
> relink it with any future releases of the LGPLed code. I think that
> means that I need to give them a linker and teach them how to use it,
> and I do not want to go there.

Surely you're joking? 

Does this mean that if they lose their hands in an accident, you have to 
come sit at their computer and do their typing?

The LGPL and GPL don't grant people "the ability" to do anything, since 
that's not within our power to grant. Some people don't want to, or 
can't, program, or don't have time. It's not like the LGPL is the bite of 
a radioactive spider that can grant superpowers. It is a licence which 
grants *permissions*.

In that regard, that's absolutely no different to the MIT licence, or 
proprietary software licences, which also deal in permissions (and 
restrictions). If I go to my local computer retailer and buy a copy of 
Windows, Microsoft doesn't grant me the ability to run the software. If I 
say "I don't actually have a computer, and the electricity has been shut 
off, so you have to pay to have the power turned back on and give me a 
computer", you won't get anywhere. The licence permits you to run one 
copy of Windows on one machine. Everything else is up to you.


-- 
Steven