Hacker News Reader

Hmm, doesn't the LGPL allow you to remove any additional restrictions?

It says it does, but in at least one lawsuit courts have outright said that this language does not apply to copyright holders. Which is explicitly opposed to the FSF's own intent drafting the license, which was to prohibit copyright owners from calling their license "GPL plus (insert nonfree clause here)"

It is like the license needs a bootstrapping license

Interesting - do you mean because of the "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed" clause? I wonder.

No, the GPLv3 includes this language:

> All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term.

And the LGPLv3 incorporates the GPLv3 by reference, then grants additional permissions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com