[Savannah-register-public] Re: [gnu.org #333179] CPL + LGPL = compatible?

[Sylvain Beucler]

On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 06:58:30PM -0400, Karl Berry via RT wrote:
> Hi Sylvain,
> 
> > It is possible to use the LGPL instead?
> 
> Since it is possible to use LGPL'd code with *proprietary* software, I
> would certainly hope it can be used with the CPL, ASL, etc.

I'm not so sure, because the CPL is a copyleft.

We couldn't combine GPL + LGPL if there weren't the explicit
conversion clause in the LGPL. Both licenses need to accept the
combination.


Moreover the CPL authors seem to have a different interpretation of
"derivative work" than ours (eg "Contributions do not include
additions to the Program which: (i) are separate modules of software
distributed in conjunction with the Program under their own license
agreement, and (ii) are not derivative works of the Program." - which
we would interpret as "void set", afaik). That doesn't help.


> As long as
> the code under each license is distinct, of course.  (That is, that the
> LGPL'd code doesn't actually derive from the CPL/ASL'd code.  I doubt
> this is the case.)
> 
> Of course, Brett can say more authoritatively.
> 
> License proliferation sucks.

-- 
Sylvain