[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Haskell-cafe] short licensing question

Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] short licensing question
From: Matthias-Christian Ott
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:18:50 +0100
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:02:46PM -0600, Tom Tobin wrote:
> 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/

You can also ask the Freedom Task Force of the FSFE:

http://fsfe.org/projects/ftf/ftf.en.html

They may offer better legal advice for Europe.

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

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