Subject: Re: Use of LGPL images in proprietary software?
From: Cinly Ooi <cinly.ooi@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:57:28 +0100
Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:57:28 +0100
Dear John, Mala,

> i found an icon set licensed with LGPL which I would like to use in
> > proprietary (and potentially commercial) software.
>

[snip]


> > 2. Can they be embedded in binary files (e.g. statically linked into
> > the executable) or do they need to be accessible for the user?
>
> They need to be readily replaceable by the user.  This does not mean
> that if the user replaces them with unsuitable images (wrong format,
> wrong size, whatever) that your program has to still work.  It means
> that if a new version of the images becomes available, the user can
> easily plug them into your software.
>
> So either you need to ship an editor that can modify your executables, or
> you need to make them separate, perhaps as separate files or in a zipfile.
>
>
I believe in this case we have to treat "images" as "source code" in LGPL
speaks.

I agree that others must be able to get hold of the images, but I am not
sure that it is necessary to make the images editable or replaceable in the
binary file itself. Can you elaborate?


Thank you and best regards,
Cinly

*****
I promise to take all due care and respect for you email, BUT will not agree
to abide to any T&C you care to attach to the email. This applies especially
if this is a reply to your  email  containing one.


Dear John, Mala,

> i found an icon set licensed with LGPL which I would like to use in
> proprietary (and potentially commercial) software.

[snip]
 
> 2. Can they be embedded in binary files (e.g. statically linked into
> the executable) or do they need to be accessible for the user?

They need to be readily replaceable by the user.  This does not mean
that if the user replaces them with unsuitable images (wrong format,
wrong size, whatever) that your program has to still work.  It means
that if a new version of the images becomes available, the user can
easily plug them into your software.

So either you need to ship an editor that can modify your executables, or
you need to make them separate, perhaps as separate files or in a zipfile.


I believe in this case we have to treat "images" as "source code" in LGPL speaks.

I agree that others must be able to get hold of the images, but I am not sure that it is necessary to make the images editable or replaceable in the binary file itself. Can you elaborate?


Thank you and best regards,
Cinly

*****
I promise to take all due care and respect for you email, BUT will not agree to abide to any T&C you care to attach to the email. This applies especially if this is a reply to your  email  containing one.