Re: Re: Re: [oc] GNU LGPL license

[Damjan Lampret <lampret@opencores.org>]

> 
> It's too bad there's such a big lag on the mailinglist.

There are some subscribers that have no longer valid email addresses. This is pretty much
what is causing the delays. Removing them is a bit of problem, but working on that.

Anyway there is kind of a half way around the problem. Instead of waiting for emails, you can go to
http://www.opencores.org/forums/cores/2002/04/?view=thread. Update on the web is real fast.

> 
> I too checked the available licenses, and GPL or LPGL are the one that 
> matches our requirements closest.
> 
> In one of my previous emails about this I suggested an addendum with an 
> exception clause for clausule 5, 6. I still think this is the best way to go. 
> We do not modify the original license, thereby undermining the maintainers of 
> the GNU licenses, we merely add and exception to make it better suited for 
> hardware projects. This is perfectly legal, and holds up in court.
> 

I like it. Maybe it would also be good to get professional opinion (ie. from a lawyer).

I was wondering, how does wording in the GNU LGPL apply to HW. In HW there is no executables etc. One might want to argue that a netlist is not an executable. In fact An executable would be more like a FPGA bitstream file or ASIC GDSII file. I'd really like to hear lawyer's opinion.

regards,
Damjan


--
To unsubscribe from cores mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml