Changeset - 9ab67f312539
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
donaldr3 - 10 years ago 2014-03-21 23:23:04
donald@copyrighteous.office.fsf.org
the
1 file changed with 5 insertions and 5 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -3918,33 +3918,33 @@ as the following:
 
The LGPL's preamble sets forth the limits to which the license seeks to go in
 
chasing these goals. The LGPL is designed to ensure that users who happen to
 
acquire software linked with such libraries have full freedoms with
 
respect to that library. They should have the ability to upgrade to a newer
 
or modified Free version or to make their own modifications, even if they
 
cannot modify the primary software program that links to that library.
 

	
 
Finally, the preamble introduces two terms used throughout the license to
 
clarify between the different types of derivative works: ``works that use
 
the library,'' and ``works based on the library.''  Unlike the GPL, the LGPL must
 
draw some lines regarding derivative works. We do this here in this
 
license because we specifically seek to liberalize the rights afforded to
 
those who make derivative works. In GPL, we reach as far as copyright law
 
allows. In LGPL, we want to draw a line that allows some derivative works
 
those who make derivative works. In the GPL, we reach as far as copyright law
 
allows. In the LGPL, we want to draw a line that allows some derivative works
 
copyright law would otherwise prohibit if the copyright holder exercised
 
his full permitted controls over the work.
 

	
 
\section{An Application: A Work that Uses the Library}
 

	
 
In the effort to allow certain proprietary derivative works and prohibit
 
others, LGPL distinguishes between two classes of derivative works:
 
others, the LGPL distinguishes between two classes of derivative works:
 
``works based on the library,'' and ``works that use the library.''  The
 
distinction is drawn on the bright line of binary (or runtime) derivative
 
works and source code derivatives. We will first consider the definition
 
of a ``work that uses the library,'' which is set forth in LGPLv2.1~\S5.
 

	
 
We noted in our discussion of GPLv2~\S3 (discussed in
 
Section~\ref{GPLv2s3} of this document) that binary programs when
 
compiled and linked with GPL'd software are derivative works of that GPL'd
 
software. This includes both linking that happens at compile-time (when
 
the binary is created) or at runtime (when the binary -- including library
 
and main program both -- is loaded into memory by the user). In GPL,
 
binary derivative works are controlled by the terms of the license (in GPLv2~\S3),
...
 
@@ -3967,25 +3967,25 @@ the library,'' works as follows:
 
  independent works, there is no copyright obligation on this new copyright
 
  holder with regard to the licensing of \worki{}, at least with regard to
 
  the source code.
 

	
 
\item The new copyright holder, for her software to be useful, realizes
 
  that it cannot run without combining \worki{} and \workl{}.
 
  Specifically, when she creates a running binary program, that running
 
  binary must be a derivative work, called \lplusi{}, that the user can
 
  run.
 

	
 
\item Since \lplusi{} is a derivative work of both \worki{} and \workl{},
 
  the license of \workl{} (the LGPL) can put restrictions on the license
 
  of \lplusi{}. In fact, this is what LGPL does.
 
  of \lplusi{}. In fact, this is what the LGPL does.
 

	
 
\end{itemize}
 

	
 
We will talk about the specific restrictions LGPLv2.1 places on ``works
 
that use the library'' in detail in Section~\ref{lgpl-section-6}. For
 
now, focus on the logic related to how the LGPLv2.1 places requirements on
 
the license of \lplusi{}. Note, first of all, the similarity between
 
this explanation and that in Section~\ref{separate-and-independent},
 
which discussed the combination of otherwise separate and independent
 
works with GPL'd code. Effectively, what LGPLv2.1 does is say that when a
 
new work is otherwise separate and independent, but has interface
 
calls out to an LGPL'd library, then it is considered a ``work that
...
 
@@ -4018,25 +4018,25 @@ a ``work that uses the library.''  If the answer to the first question
 
\worki{} is neither a ``work that uses the library'' nor a ``work based on
 
the library.''  If the answer to the first question is ``no,'' but the
 
answer to the second question is ``yes,'' then an investigation into
 
whether or not \worki{} is in fact a ``work based on the library'' is
 
warranted.
 

	
 
\section{The Library, and Works Based On It}
 

	
 
In short, a ``work based on the library'' could be defined as any
 
derivative work of LGPL'd software that cannot otherwise fit the
 
definition of a ``work that uses the library.''  A ``work based on the
 
library'' extends the full width and depth of copyright derivative works,
 
in the same sense that GPL does.
 
in the same sense that the GPL does.
 

	
 
Most typically, one creates a ``work based on the library'' by directly
 
modifying the source of the library. Such a work could also be created by
 
tightly integrating new software with the library. The lines are no doubt
 
fuzzy, just as they are with GPL'd works, since copyright law gives us no
 
litmus test for derivative works of a software program.
 

	
 
Thus, the test to use when considering whether something is a ``work
 
based on the library'' is as follows:
 

	
 
\begin{enumerate}
 

	
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)