| [eigen] Re: [gnu.org #544584] Re: Statically linking to a library that uses a LGPL template library |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
]
- To: licensing@xxxxxxx
- Subject: [eigen] Re: [gnu.org #544584] Re: Statically linking to a library that uses a LGPL template library
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 09:49:55 -0400
- Cc: eigen <eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tU2h/Qo86qDPuP3LV19PwN1zQfdCNh6Yb9hv489iKvY=; b=oZwg9E2T6NkZk+elnmtEbRIqG4J1XGX8wUHXGvAcrTlZzkT6cXcjt30gkHVuTzXi9h Ds3xjHuJdxU+iZlqS3lo/wEWkkyINzPkkDQU130pAfFSuX6c8t6ylhVXj3aF/bWsbj7A nD+cj2mZ6sjmPST3Jk65VvNGQk61LxjSXaYxg=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=vCHVk1Aip+e7teUHHSxgWAsZ4Np++xRF97+Q0hby14SNcEtCbp3/842aWEFkKCJJxJ ln2o5Pwxof7NdpBwKRbtV++noZh/ljTpHVA6J/XKxIDtYDIZZTlad1bXCIZo96aSIURP ij0Q+tQUecMCqgPPXEdf705TewbqdyuDmJeho=
Hello,
2010/5/3 Yoni Rabkin via RT <licensing@xxxxxxx>:
>
> Hello,
>
> Please accept our apologies for the delay in getting back to you. We
> rely on volunteer effort and often have difficulties keeping up with
> the demand for our expertise.
Then here are two things you could do:
- expand your FAQ / documentation; or
- simplify your licenses.
Indeed the question I was asking has been asked several times by my users.
Fortunately I think I've been able to figure it out, see:
http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Licensing_FAQ#But_what_if_an_application_A_links_statically_to_a_library_B_that_uses_Eigen.3F
I'm interested in any comment you might have on this interpretation.
>
>> Hi List,
>
>> I have a question.
>> Suppose that X is a LGPLv3-licensed headers-only C++ template library.
>> Suppose that Y is a BSD-licensed C++ binary library that uses X by
>> #including its headers, following Section 3 of the LGPLv3.
>> Suppose that Z is a proprietary application that statically links to Y.
>
>> My question is, does the LGPL license extend to Z?
>
>> I hope that no.
>
> We offer our services by paid consultation to non-free software
> developers.
We are free software developers. This is for the Eigen project,
http://eigen.tuxfamily.org
> We will require 30 minutes of consultation time, at a cost of $150. If
> you wish to proceed, please make a payment by credit card at
> [https://www.fsf.org/licensing/payment/] and e-mail us to let us know
> that you have done so. We will then send you an e-mail answering your
> questions, and allow you appropriate follow up. If you prefer to discuss
> this by telephone, just let us know what times are good for you.
We are a free software project, not even accepting donations, so our
financial resources are zero.
I don't see a problem with the FSF offering paid consulting services
on its licenses, as long of course as it doesn't constitute a conflict
of interest against simplifying these licenses and/or documenting them
better.
> If you do not want to pay for this service, I suggest you carefully
> review the resources we provide about licensing at
> [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html]
Already done.
> and refer to your legal
> counsel.
(already addressed that misunderstanding).
Regards,
Benoit
>
> Thank you
>
> --
> I am not a lawyer, the above is not legal advice
>
> Regards, Yoni Rabkin
>
>
>
>