GPL-3.0 vs. LGPL-3.0

Attribute	GPL-3.0	LGPL-3.0
License Type	Strong copyleft	Weak copyleft
Derivative Works	Must be licensed under GPL-3.0	Can be linked with proprietary software
Compatibility	Not compatible with proprietary software	Compatible with proprietary software
Usage	For projects that want to ensure all derivative works are open source	For projects that want to allow linking with proprietary software

Introduction

When it comes to open-source licenses, the GNU General Public License (GPL) and the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) are two of the most widely used licenses in the software industry. Both licenses are created by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and are designed to protect the rights of users and developers of open-source software. While both licenses share some similarities, they also have key differences that make them suitable for different types of projects.

Scope of Application

One of the main differences between GPL-3.0 and LGPL-3.0 is the scope of application. GPL-3.0 is a strong copyleft license, which means that any derivative work based on a GPL-licensed software must also be released under the GPL license. This ensures that the source code of the software remains open and freely available to all users. On the other hand, LGPL-3.0 is a weaker copyleft license that allows developers to link their proprietary software with LGPL-licensed libraries without having to release the source code of their proprietary software.

Compatibility

Another important aspect to consider when choosing between GPL-3.0 and LGPL-3.0 is compatibility with other licenses. GPL-3.0 is not compatible with proprietary licenses, as it requires that any derivative work based on a GPL-licensed software must also be released under the GPL license. This can be a limitation for developers who want to use GPL-licensed software in conjunction with proprietary software. On the other hand, LGPL-3.0 is more permissive and allows developers to link their proprietary software with LGPL-licensed libraries without imposing the same restrictions as the GPL license.

Dynamic vs. Static Linking

One of the key differences between GPL-3.0 and LGPL-3.0 is how they handle dynamic and static linking. GPL-3.0 considers dynamic linking to be a form of distribution, which means that any software that dynamically links to a GPL-licensed library must also be released under the GPL license. This can be a problem for developers who want to use GPL-licensed libraries in their proprietary software. On the other hand, LGPL-3.0 allows for dynamic linking without imposing the same restrictions as the GPL license, making it more suitable for developers who want to use LGPL-licensed libraries in their proprietary software.

Modification of Code

When it comes to modifying the code of GPL-3.0 and LGPL-3.0 licensed software, there are some differences to consider. GPL-3.0 requires that any modifications made to a GPL-licensed software must be released under the GPL license. This ensures that the source code of the software remains open and freely available to all users. On the other hand, LGPL-3.0 allows developers to make modifications to LGPL-licensed libraries without having to release the source code of their proprietary software. This can be a significant advantage for developers who want to customize LGPL-licensed libraries for their proprietary software.

Conclusion

In conclusion, both GPL-3.0 and LGPL-3.0 are important open-source licenses that offer different levels of protection and flexibility for developers and users of open-source software. While GPL-3.0 is a strong copyleft license that ensures the source code of the software remains open and freely available, LGPL-3.0 is a weaker copyleft license that allows for more flexibility in how developers can use and distribute LGPL-licensed libraries. Ultimately, the choice between GPL-3.0 and LGPL-3.0 will depend on the specific needs and goals of the project, as well as the desired level of protection and compatibility with other licenses.