Since copyright applies to expression and not algorhyms, I don't see how this 'brain pollution' argument applies unless the programmer concerned has a photographic memory.
On Sunday 17 February 2002 11:23, David Laight wrote:
I haven't contributed any code so I will not state my opinion (but you can guess that) hehe.
Ah, but if I read the issues correctly, that isn't the problem! If the LGPL license were in force it would matter whether you had READ any of the code.
If you see a small fragment of code in LGPL source (even something relatively trivial like some odd list handling routine) and later write the same (or very similar) code in some commercial software, the LGPL license might be construed to apply to the entire commercial software product - there is no way this is acceptable.
David