Umm... I might be wrong (and if, please excuse) but isn't LGPL exactly for the purpose of being able to link against LGPL'ed works and not violating the LGPL license, be it statically or dynamically?
Exactly, but you also have to explicitely mention which lgpl libraries your are using.
Nonetheless I think that Lame itself is in violation of the GPL and LGPL since GPL and LGPL explicetly forbid patented technologies under the terms of the LGPL or GPL. And since there is no doubt in the fact that the MP3 technology is patented I even think that applying the GPL or LGPL to Lame is not possible at all - at least in a unaltered version.
We had an argumentation regarding this point with Stallman and the only conclusion that was drawn was that he did not care about it.
Perhaps we should add an addendum to our license, but until now it seems to fit quite well.
The same patent point would also apply to Mpglib, Mad, the Linux kernel,...
Regards,
--
Gabriel Bouvigne www.mp3-tech.org personal page: http://gabriel.mp3-tech.org
_______________________________________________ mp3encoder mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
