To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldrawOpen lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / Organizations / LDraw / 3189
3188  |  3190
Subject: 
Re: License Intent
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
Date: 
Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:38:01 GMT
Viewed: 
9744 times
  
Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:

> >  a) GPL or LGPL style license, the "viral effect" of the
> >     license means that those who get the rendering also
> >     should get (access to) the source for the DAT file and
> >     the relevant parts of the LDraw Parts Library.
> 
> Actually I beliee that this is the exact case where the
> LGPL differes from the GPL.
> 
> Since the Parts 'library' will only be referecned as a
> library, I think that (if the LGPL were used on it,) it's
> license wouldn't pollute the license of the model/scene it
> was used to render.

From <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html>:

  »However, linking a "work that uses the Library"  with the
   Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the
   Library (because it contains portions of the Library),
   rather than a "work that uses the library". The
   executable is therefore covered by this License. Section
   6 states terms for distribution of such executables.«

I.e. a rendered LDR file _is_ considered a derivative work
and thus covered by the license.  LGPL is only special for
dynamic linking (roughly speaking at least).

Play well,

Jacob
--
A password should be like a toothbrush. Use it every day;
change it regularly; and DON'T share it with friends.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: License Intent
 
(...) [snip] (...) I read the exact same clause and come to exactly the opposite conclusion. My reasoning is that because linking is something you do to code, not LDraw parts; the clause has no bearing to LDraw parts. Is my interpretation right, or (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: License Intent
 
(...) Actually I beliee that this is the exact case where the LGPL differes from the GPL. Since the Parts 'library' will only be referecned as a library, I think that (if the LGPL were used on it,) it's license wouldn't pollute the license of the (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

139 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR