Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

2010/11/9 Rimas Kudelis <>:

Talking about this, would it perhaps be possible to license oficial builds
differently than source code? Instead of telling the user to agree to a
source license, we could probably present them with a short, understandable
and localized EULA.

LGPL is not an EULA. In fact I don't think we need an EULA. The users
should be informed about their rights but they can install and use
LibreOffice even if they don't accept LGPL. LGPL says nothing about
installing and using free software, everyone is free to do that. Its
terms should be followed only in case of redistribution and

However, if this is not possible, here's an alternate proposal: how about we
prepend the license with a localized string that would contain short
localized summary of the license, and explain in a few words that the
license itself is in English and that only English text is legally binding.

+1 (license.html, license.txt etc.)


E-mail to for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.