We plan to ship an application together with the required dynamic-libraries (SO/DLL), we link dynamically against one of these libraries, which uses the others libraries.
The LGPL requires us to provide the libraries-sources. I assume I can provide the sources in a second package from our server, servers of the original projects or using the possibility to offer the code for three years (see Section 6, GPL). At the moment I tend to use that three year clause from Section 6, Paragraph B of the GPL. Because literally nobody will replace the libraries and if they want, the will likely use newer versions of the library which we don't use. Furthermore, we don't have to maintain the downloads on ourselves, just keep a backup of the library-sources.


  • Is that correct?
  • Do you now a good example of a closed-source application, which comes together with LGPL-Libraries?

I thought about looking at libflashplayer, but that is a bad example. Adobe just includes a copyright notice and the LGPL. Which is probably okay, because they don't deliver the LGPL-Libraries on their own and assume they are available. I can't, because we target also Windows and have to provide our stuff in a complete package. Thankfully we can build our work on the libraries and the LGPL, but it is weirdly written.

I originally asked this question on Stack Overflow, but wasn't able to move it here, so I opened here this question again.

// update:
We're linking against libmicrohttpd* which is using the LGPLv2.1 or at option any later version. Furthermore we running the executable on a regular IBM compatible personal-computer and not shipping it on a device or appliance. As far as I know, we are not building up on any patented-stuff.

*I can really recommend this project, the people are helpful and friendly. I should spend some euros for them.

  • Are the libraries LGPL 2.1 or LGPL 3.0? The requirements for both disclosure and distribution can be interpreted slightly differently between those two versions of the LGPL. Commented Oct 12, 2016 at 11:59
  • Also, on a related but maybe off-topic note, if you are using an LGPL 2.1 library that contains patented technology in a commercial product the patent owners might start asking for money, so this is also something you'll want to consider. Commented Oct 12, 2016 at 12:08

1 Answer 1


Yes, a written offer to provide the library source code on a medium suitable for software exchange (for LGPL 2.1 this would be something like a DVD) at a cost covering your expenses is one of the options you have. You do not need to host the source code on a web server.

You should be able to find plenty of examples of this kind of commercial use with any Android device manufacturer (Samsung, Sony, Motorola, HTC, etc) as Android devices are normally shipped with several LGPL licensed libraries installed.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.