[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPL vs. LGPL
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: GPL vs. LGPL |
Date: |
Fri, 26 Nov 2010 16:02:29 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
> "James Lowe" <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> he mentioned iPad and so I assume he is (obliquely) referring to this kind
>> of thing:
>>
>> http://www.fsf.org/news/2010-05-app-store-compliance
>>
>> (there is another link within that thread that covers GPL not
>> compatible with App Store)
>>
>> I don't pretend to understand the differences in the licensing - so
>> don't 'have a pop' at me if you think I am wanting a discussion - I
>> don't but was just trying to give some context, but I also believe
>> we've covered this before (in the last year) but I couldn't find the
>> thread.
>
> I don't think that the LGPL would fare significantly better.
Just read <URL:http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/terms.html>:
USAGE RULES
(i) You shall be authorized to use Products only for personal,
noncommercial use.
(ii) You shall be authorized to use Products on five
Apple-authorized devices at any time, except for Content Rentals
(see below).
(iii) You shall be able to store Products from up to five different
Accounts at a time on compatible devices, provided that each iPhone
may sync ringtone Products with only a single Apple-authorized
device at a time, and syncing an iPhone with a different
Apple-authorized device will cause ringtone Products stored on that
iPhone to be erased.
There is nothing whatsoever gained for the purpose of promoting free
access to music typesetting by letting Lilypond get distributed under
such terms. Obviously the goals of the GNU project are completely at
odds with such distribution conditions, and one would look for
acceptable distribution paths instead.
--
David Kastrup