Re: Move to LGPL3

["Dominic Lachowicz" <domlachowicz gmail com>]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Mark Mielke <mark mark mielke cc> wrote:
> Jean Bréfort wrote:
>  > Windows API (and may be DirectX) is a special case, because you can't
>  > write a Windows program without using it.
>  >
>
>  It's not a special case. There is certainly no reference to the Windows
>  API in the GPL or the LGPL.
>
>  The only license that matters when it comes to deciding whether or not
>  you can link to the Windows API, is the license that Microsoft grants
>  you for the Windows API. The GPL cannot dictate how you may or may not
>  make use of the Windows API. I do not see a clause anywhere that states
>  "you may never derive from, or make us of, a non-GPL or non-LGPL
>  library." It is always the product you are deriving from, or making use

There's no explicit reference to the Windows API in the GPL or LGPL,
but there's an important clause in both the GPLv2.0 and LGPL2.1:

"However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not
include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or
binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on)
of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that
component itself accompanies the executable. "

In this case, the Windows API and DirectX would be considered
"normally distributed major components" of the operating system, and
thus be ok to use in a L/GPL licensed work.

Dom