RE: LGPL - wait a minute!

[Erik Ch. Ohrnberger]

Hold on one minute!

In COPYING.addendum it states:

As a special exception to the GNU General Public License, permission is 
granted for additional uses of the text contained in its release 
of Common C++.
 
The exception is that, if you link the Common C++ library with other
files to produce an executable, this does not by itself cause the
resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License.
Your use of that executable is in no way restricted on account of
linking the Common C++ library code into it.

This exception does not however invalidate any other reasons why
the executable file might be covered by the GNU General Public License.


        If this is the case, then it would appear that I can link the
CommonC++ code into my executable and I'll still be OK for a proprietary end
resulting program.  (Do I have this correct?)

        Darn.  Now I'm very confused.  Would one of the authors of Common
C++ Please clear this issue up?

        Thanks,
                Erik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erik Ch. Ohrnberger [mailto:address@hidden 
> Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 10:04 AM
> To: 'address@hidden'
> Subject: RE: LGPL
> 
> 
> Edgar,
>       I think you are right to be concerned.  Quoting now 
> from the COPYING file in the commoncpp2-1.1.1 distribution:
> 
> This General Public License does not permit incorporating 
> your program into proprietary programs.  If your program is a 
> subroutine library, you may consider it more useful to permit 
> linking proprietary applications with the library.  If this 
> is what you want to do, use the GNU Library General Public 
> License instead of this License.
> 
>       If this is the case, I guess I'll have to stop using 
> the library as well, even though I'm only using the object 
> persistence part.
> 
>       Well, back to the drawing board.  My employer can't, or 
> will not, release the program that I'm writing for him as 
> open source.  I'm afraid it's a policy that I'll not be able 
> to change.
> 
>       Erik.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: address@hidden
> > [mailto:address@hidden On 
> > Behalf Of edgar wander
> > Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 5:22 AM
> > To: address@hidden
> > Subject: LGPL
> > 
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> >    I need to release a CLOSED SOURCE software, for comercial
> > use (enterprise 
> > commpetitive reazons). That sofware are based in Threads and 
> > Socket from 
> > Common C++ library.
> > 
> >    In order to provide the sofware I need a binary
> > representation: .o or 
> > executable.
> > 
> >    I thing that, I can make Wrappers Classes in order to 
> decouple and
> > isolate the cc++ library services from my code, then compile 
> > them to create 
> > a .o files, and then THIS OBJECTS FILES ARE MY PRODUCT, AND I 
> > CAN COPY RIGTH 
> > THEM. The cc++ library are then dynamic linked.
> > 
> >   But, I wonder (because I feel "legal fear"):
> > -- is it a really legal action ?
> > -- Can I copy rigth the .o code, compiled using g++ ?
> > -- where can I found specific information about, using the
> > LGPL as a basis 
> > for CLOSED SOFTWARE ?,( the LGPL-GPL FAQ are not clear, 
> > considering that it 
> > is a legal matter !)
> > 
> > Thanks !
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Charla con tus amigos en línea mediante MSN Messenger:
> > http://messenger.microsoft.com/es
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-> commoncpp
> > 
>