Ok, so I got word from GNU. What they say is that using "imports" the way Python does is considered creating derivative work, and LGPL would not, in their view, except the vendor from the obligation to release their apps under the terms of (L)GPL (which is kinda surprising). As solution to this they suggested two things:
1. make dual license, of which the commercial license would be for-pay and would allow companies to make closed-source derivatives or distribution of web2py and/or web2py apps 2. make an exeption clause under GPL for the apps (which is what Massimo does and is perfectly ok) I think it'd be best that the source version of web2py be covered by the 2., and that the 'freeware' version be made 'shareware' (pay to bundle the binary, that is) as an option 1. At any rate, the conclusion is that the exception does cover the proprietary distribution of web2py apps and does not violate GPL. On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Branko Vukelic <bg.bra...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Anthony <abasta...@gmail.com> wrote: >> source and freeware for binaries) rather than "LGPL with a commercial >> exception" (which could lead to confusion and concern). > > LGPL _is_ the commercial exception. That's why they call it "lesser". :) > > > -- > Branko Vukelić > > bg.bra...@gmail.com > stu...@brankovukelic.com > > Check out my blog: http://www.brankovukelic.com/ > Check out my portfolio: http://www.flickr.com/photos/foxbunny/ > Registered Linux user #438078 (http://counter.li.org/) > I hang out on identi.ca: http://identi.ca/foxbunny > > Gimp Brushmakers Guild > http://bit.ly/gbg-group > -- Branko Vukelić bg.bra...@gmail.com stu...@brankovukelic.com Check out my blog: http://www.brankovukelic.com/ Check out my portfolio: http://www.flickr.com/photos/foxbunny/ Registered Linux user #438078 (http://counter.li.org/) I hang out on identi.ca: http://identi.ca/foxbunny Gimp Brushmakers Guild http://bit.ly/gbg-group
