> On 26 May 2019, at 13:13, Andres Salomon <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm wondering if the way forward
> here would be to ask the seafile folks to add your copyright info (as wel l
> as theirs), and the GPLv3 license to the db-wrapper code, and to also
> include the GPLv2 exception file as well? Would that satisfy legal
> constraints as far as shipping the GPLv3 code inside of a GPLv2
> project in Debian?
This would certainly satisfy our complaint and solve the copyright infringement in Seafile with regards to libzdb. The license exception will have to include AGPL as well, which (now) is the license used in the seafile-server.
Let’s hope this is a way forward. Though, I would not bet on it. If you think about the motivation for the Seafile team's actions, it is easy to construct a story in which they wanted to free themselves from GPL code so they could license Seafile under AGPL and also use the code in their proprietary closed-source Pro Edition . At the same time, I can’t see why the Seafile team would not have this issue resolved to avoid any future legal ramifications.