VMime and odd "commercial" LGPL licensing?

Question

Greetings,

I'm looking for a MIME library, which is available under the LGPL. After some googling, I found VMime. After browsing their site some, I came across the Licensing page, which confuses me a bit.

• Firstly, they offer VMime under the terms of the GPL, which is pretty clear.
• Secondly, they offer VMime under a "commercial" license - the LGPL.

They allow the usage of the library under the terms of the LGPL, but you

• have to pay a "fee" to use the LGPL license,
• have to pay a "fee" for every project you use this library for.

This made me curious, and I started browsing the FSF site for more information regarding this, which states:

Does the GPL allow me to charge a fee for downloading the program from my site?

Yes. You can charge any fee you wish for distributing a copy of the program. If you distribute binaries by download, you must provide “equivalent access” to download the source—therefore, the fee to download source may not be greater than the fee to download the binary.

I can understand that, but they offer their downloads via SourceForge, so it can't be this fee.

Does the GPL allow me to require that anyone who receives the software must pay me a fee and/or notify me?

No. In fact, a requirement like that would make the program non-free. If people have to pay when they get a copy of a program, or if they have to notify anyone in particular, then the program is not free. See the definition of free software.

The GPL is a free software license, and therefore it permits people to use and even redistribute the software without being required to pay anyone a fee for doing so.

Ah, ha. Let's imagine I never browse their website, and I used a package like this one on Ubuntu, I'd use the library under the terms of the "normal" LGPL, not their "commercial" variant.

I guess, since the package appeared in the Ubuntu repository, I can use it under the terms of the LGPL, and dynamically link it to proprietary code; just like every other LGPL licensed software?

Then I came across this:

If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?

No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.

Any ideas?

So that would mean that the Ubuntu package is the "GPL" variant, which does not include the LGPL terms. Or how do I have to understand that?

In before "ask a lawyer".

Answer 1

IANAL.

have to pay a "fee" for every project you use this library for.

If it really is the LGPL, that isn't technically true. You could license it from the copyright holder for each project and pay them each time or (if I remember the LGPL correctly) you could license it from them the first time, and then license it from yourself for each subsequent project. If you could find another LGPL license holder (for this software) then you could license it from them.

So that would mean that the Ubuntu package is the "GPL" variant, which does not include the LGPL terms

The copyright file included with the Ubuntu package contains a copy of the GPL, not the LGPL.

Answer 2

Update:

I contacted the developer and it seems that the developer missed some aspects of the LGPL and tried to turn it into a "commercial" license, that prevented licensees from re-distributing the code under the terms of the LGPL.

Let's see what happens, I guess that he'll make it available under a "true commercial" license as well.