Follow

/licensing nerds: A library is licensed as LGPL, I read its source and re-implement the functionality (e.g. port it to a different language). AIUI the result is a derivative work. Am I allowed to publish it under a BSD/MIT/Apache… license?

· · Web · 1 · 1 · 0

@Merovius I might be counted as a licensing nerd but I'm very unfair if that in fact a derivative work. If it is, you can't, it needs to stay LGPL. But at least under European law maybe it isn't since ideas and algorithms themselves are not copyright-able, only the implementation is. So it probably depends on how close the port is.

@rami Hm. I mean, it would make sense for it to have to be LGPL, but I don't like that. "Common sense" says it's a derivative work. But… oh well. IP law.

In practice, I'd probably go with "just use Apache and hope they don't care enough" anyways.

@Merovius I just read the LGPL and it does not use the term "derived work".
It includes rules for "If you modify a copy of the Library", which you didn't, and for combined works, which you also didn't.

I think this makes jt even more unclear in this case 🙊

@Merovius IANAL but I'd read that as "the LGPL makes no restrictions on how you license your port into another language". It is unclear to me if you are allowed to do that port *at all* in the first place, but ... most LGPL code authors would probably say yes.

@rami I was basing my lack of understanding on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Less and some google-foo. And I basically ran into the same confusion. Hence my question =D

Sign in to participate in the conversation
chaos.social

chaos.social – a Fediverse instance for & by the Chaos community