as a simple reply isn't sent to the list....
----- Forwarded message from Joerg Mayer jmayer@loplof.de -----
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:22:11 +0100 From: Joerg Mayer jmayer@loplof.de To: Aric Cyr Aric.Cyr@gmail.com Subject: Re: has the LGPL licence fell through ? In-Reply-To: loom.20051221T082013-24@post.gmane.org
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 07:48:09AM +0000, Aric Cyr wrote:
Maybe I'll fire off an email to Turbolinux to see what they have to say, although technically unless I purchase or receive their product I am not directly entitled to the GPL/LGPL code from them. Anyone have a copy of
Can you please let me know why you think that?
---------------------------- 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Library or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Library, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) The modified work must itself be a software library.
b) You must cause the files modified to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
c) You must cause the whole of the work to be licensed at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. ... -------------------------------
So I guess if they are using some code of yours that you provided to them under LGPL, you are entiteld to request the source. In case this goes to court you'll need a copy, but for now it is sufficient to be sure that they are distributing a product based on your code which is covered by the LGPL. Again: It is *you* who granted them the right to use your code, and by putting it under LGPL you made sure that you are entitled to any changes they make to *the* code once they start distributing your code (or derivatives) to thrid parties. That way you can reqeust the changes even when the new product costs $10M.
Ciao Joerg