I am Shobha working in a product company.
I am planning to use this project in our product, however, due to licensing issues we arent able to get an approval on using it.
Would be very helpful, if you can offer a dual license along with the one thats existing, something similar to Apache v 2.0.
Please let me know if its possible.
Regards
Shobha
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Obviously this is a very old post, but I'm in the same boat. I'd like to use the library but cannot use LGPL (even with the "L" on the front). Would it be possible to offer an alternative license for the library such as MIT or Apache?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Can you please provide a bit more info why you need a different license. What are your problems with the license.
RBRi
On Fri, 06 May 2016 18:46:15 +0000 Scott Wells wrote:
Obviously this is a very old post, but I'm in the same boat. I'd like to use the library but cannot use LGPL (even with the "L" on the front). Would it be possible to offer an alternative license for the
library such as MIT or Apache?
Thanks for the quick response. I'd like to use the library in a commercial application written in Java which has some IP protection mechanisms in place such as obfuscation and digital signatures. These precautions would seem to violate certain terms of LGPL, in particular allowing users of my application to update your library in-place and reverse engineer the code in my application that invokes your library to help debug that update if necessary.
thanks for bringing some light into this.
Will be not in front of my desk for some days. So please be a bit patiant. Will come back to this topic during the next week.
RBRi
On Fri, 06 May 2016 19:22:26 +0000 Scott Wells wrote:
Thanks for the quick response. I'd like to use the library in a commercial application written in Java which has some IP protection mechanisms in place such as obfuscation and digital
signatures. These precautions would seem to violate certain
terms of LGPL, in particular allowing users of my application to update your library in-place and reverse engineer the code in my application that invokes your library to help debug
that update if necessary.
looks like we will switch to the apache2 license for the next release (end of may).
Is this ok for you?
RBRi
On Fri, 06 May 2016 19:22:26 +0000 Scott Wells wrote:
Thanks for the quick response. I'd like to use the library in a commercial application written in Java which has some IP protection mechanisms in place such as obfuscation and digital signatures. These
precautions would seem to violate certain
terms of LGPL, in particular allowing users of my application to update your library in-place and reverse engineer the code in my application that invokes your library to help debug that update if
necessary.
Hi,
I am Shobha working in a product company.
I am planning to use this project in our product, however, due to licensing issues we arent able to get an approval on using it.
Would be very helpful, if you can offer a dual license along with the one thats existing, something similar to Apache v 2.0.
Please let me know if its possible.
Regards
Shobha
Obviously this is a very old post, but I'm in the same boat. I'd like to use the library but cannot use LGPL (even with the "L" on the front). Would it be possible to offer an alternative license for the library such as MIT or Apache?
Can you please provide a bit more info why you need a different license. What are your problems with the license.
On Fri, 06 May 2016 18:46:15 +0000 Scott Wells wrote:
Thanks for the quick response. I'd like to use the library in a commercial application written in Java which has some IP protection mechanisms in place such as obfuscation and digital signatures. These precautions would seem to violate certain terms of LGPL, in particular allowing users of my application to update your library in-place and reverse engineer the code in my application that invokes your library to help debug that update if necessary.
For what it's worth, my concern is based on this:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.en.html
Hopefully that helps you understand the motivation for my question. Thanks again!
Hi Scott,
thanks for bringing some light into this.
Will be not in front of my desk for some days. So please be a bit patiant. Will come back to this topic during the next week.
On Fri, 06 May 2016 19:22:26 +0000 Scott Wells wrote:
Hi Scott,
looks like we will switch to the apache2 license for the next release (end of may).
Is this ok for you?
On Fri, 06 May 2016 19:22:26 +0000 Scott Wells wrote: