Fwd: Do we still need weak copyleft? (was Re: Exceptions to copyleft-next)

[Theodore Tso]

On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 02:22:58PM -0500, Richard Fontana wrote:
> 
> When (many years ago now) I referred to copyleft-next as "non-weak"
> rather than "strong" I think it was because I was starting to despair
> that copyleft-next couldn't be practically implemented in such a way
> that a GPL vs LGPL sort of distinction would be meaningful. (I
> remember someone playfully accusing me of adopting the views of Larry
> Rosen.) However I don't necessarily think that now.

Heh.  I remember spending many hours in bars debating with FSF
apologists about whether a GPL-licensed library would infect across
the library interface, and they would claim that it didn't matter
whether the library was statically or dynamically linked using a
shared library.  At which point I would ask whether the GPL would also
infect across an RPC call, and if that meant the FSF was in favor of
interface copyrights.

Good times, back when I had more spare time for such debates.  :-)

     	    	      	    	       - Ted