[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Haskell-cafe] short licensing question

Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] short licensing question
From: Tom Tobin
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:02:46 -0600
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Sebastian Fischer
<[email protected]> wrote:
> when writing a Haskell library that uses two other Haskell libraries -- one
> licensed under BSD3 and one under LGPL -- what are allowed possibilities for
> licensing the written package? PublicDomain? BSD3? LGPL?

There was a long thread on licensing recently:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg68237.html

I'm still waiting to hear back from the SFLC regarding the questions
we came up with, and I'll post them as soon as I get them.  I think in
your case you can license the library you're writing any way you'd
like, but distributing a statically linked binary might leave you with
additional obligations under the LGPL.  (Things get wonderfully more
confusing when one of the libraries is the GPL, but hopefully we'll
have more insight regarding that soon.)  I'm not a lawyer, though, and
I suggest that you take any advice from non-lawyers as hints rather
than definitive answers.  If you want an answer from a lawyer, the
SFLC can be useful:

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>