Hyman Rosen <hyro...@mail.com> writes: > On 3/25/2010 9:44 AM, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: >> It's ironic because the FSF is the creator of the GPL, >> and even they recognized that the GPL was a poor fit >> for libraries which is why they created the Library >> (now Lesser) GPL. > > The FSF does not believe that the GPL is a poor fit for > libraries. They believe that when there are good non-free > alternatives to free libraries, they should use the LGPL > for the free libraries so that users will have at least > some freedom. When there are no good non-free versions > available, they will use the GPL to maximize freedom for > users.
More pragmatically: they want their licenses to be taken seriously. That involves being able to go after violations in court and/or settlements with good chances of success. Licenses covering a work "as a whole" are hard to press when the material they cover is functionally a drop-in replacement of existing non-free libraries. That makes "mere aggregation" a really good defense. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss