News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Malwarebytes' privacy VPN is Mullvad in a shady trenchcoat. Parent comment

Re:Malwarebytes' privacy VPN is Mullvad in a shady trenchcoat by wizzwizz4 on Monday October 11, 2021 @10:15AM (#28828546)
> If you go the dynamic linking route no source distribution is required.

For your code. The LGPL code still requires source distribution. (Plus, the BSD clause requires attribution.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Malwarebytes' privacy VPN is Mullvad in a shady trenchcoat by eurasiantiger on Monday October 11, 2021 @02:22PM (#28831263)
Certainly the authors of said LGPL code are distributing that source. Would it make sense to distribute the source of every .dll included in a project?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Malwarebytes' privacy VPN is Mullvad in a shady trenchcoat by wizzwizz4 on Monday October 11, 2021 @04:25PM (#28832642)
… Yes. That's your obligation under the LGPL. Pretty much your only obligation, actually – other than including the “this is this, by these people, licensed this way” boilerplate text.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Malwarebytes' privacy VPN is Mullvad in a shady trenchcoat by manquer on Monday October 11, 2021 @08:39PM (#28834678)
Alternatively you could include the offer to distribute
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Malwarebytes' privacy VPN is Mullvad in a shady trenchcoat by wizzwizz4 on Thursday October 14, 2021 @09:40AM (#28864067)
Only with (L)GPLv2, I believe.
[ Parent | on HN ]