FreeTDS Development Group

[Dossy Shiobara <dossy AT panoptic.com>]

On 2008.05.28, Craig Berry <craigberry AT mac.com> wrote:
> I can't find anything there indicating that TDS is considered to be
> one of the MCPP protocols.  It's not in the (presumably full) list of
> protocols mentioned in the license agreement [...]

It may have simply been left off.  I'll try to email someone at
Microsoft to get a clarification and/or update.

> IANAL, but it doesn't sound to me like it's at all compatible with the
> LGPL.

The MCPP license doesn't seem compatible with GPL/LGPL, but the Open
Source pledge sure does.

> >This is quite pleasant, IMHO: commercial projects need to license, open
> >source doesn't need to explicitly license.  
> 
> That may be your opinion, but unless I'm mistaken that's completely
> incompatible with the LGPL.  [...]

If this is indeed the case, then this is yet another strong argument
against using the GPL/LGPL.  (I personally prefer the MIT/BSD license.)

However, multi-licensing of works is not uncommon.  Vendors such as
MySQL offer code under GPL or commercial license.  Microsoft is
essentially doing the same here, dual-licensing the specifications.  The
MCPP licensing may not be GPL/LGPL compatible, but the Open Source
pledge should be?  (IANAL, etc., so it'd be nice to get actual strong
legal advice here.)


-- 
Dossy Shiobara              | dossy AT panoptic.com | http://dossy.org/
Panoptic Computer Network   | http://panoptic.com/
  "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
    folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)