Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
I want to repeat what I’ve said earlier on this list: For Haskell, there is no real difference between LGPL and GPL, as far as I understand it. If you don’t want to force the users of your library to use an open source license for their work then use BSD3 or a similar license for your library
Of course there is a difference and a *significant* one. * A GPL library will force commercial users of the library to release their code under GPL. * An LGPL library will force commercial users to release their source code only to the users of their program (which already bought it) and only for the purpose of recompiling with a newer version of the LGPL library. The users of the commercial program maybe be forbidden to redistribute the application source code as well as modifying the application source code e.g. to avoid licensing restrictions imposed on them by the application seller (the LGPL library user). The commercial program owner does not even need to distribute the source code with the application by default. It just needs to provide an easy way to obtain the source code for all licensed customers (those who bought it) and let them prominently know (maybe in the about box of the application) where to get the source for the purpose of recompilation with a newer version of the LGPL libs. Providing source code without any other rights than to recompile with a newer version of a LGPL lib should not be such a big deal ... that is if the commercial application author's business model does not depend on some super secret process in the code or does not have something fishy stuff to hide :) The above does not represent a difference only when you assume that all your users are crooks which will redistribute everything without a bit of hesitation. Then it is up to you whether you wan to sue them :) Am I missing something? Peter.