Do you have any links for the implications for commercial use? If I released a game made with PyGame, what's the gamble? I've seen examples of people using it commercially [0].
Namely around the language of what creates a derivative / combined work:
LGPL was intended for languages that use header files, like C and C++. So, if a project was ever accused of creating a combined work, they'd be on the hook to defend the the case, whether or not a combined work is created. In v2, the license even shifts the question onto licensee/licensor: "The threshold for this to be true is not precisely defined by law."
In licenses such as BSD/MIT/ISC/etc. these issues do not arise, and a breeze through top python projects show reciprocal contributions and access to source are commonplace without viral clauses in licenses.
For gaming, it's even more relevant, because if the deployment is to steam or a mobile phone (like what kivy does with https://github.com/kivy/python-for-android), that could easily be interpreted as a combined work. They're not like C/C++ application linking to .so / shared libraries.
So there are numerous deployments of "successful" games using PyGame, and no court cases by the creators/maintainers of PyGame towards those game developers? I'll take my chances.
I don't see what PyGame's motivation would be to open such cases.
LGPL in scripting languages is a gray area. There are no previous legal cases to cite. Python projects have transferred away from LGPL due to its ambiguity. Example dating back to 2004: https://twistedmatrix.com/pipermail/twisted-python/2004-May/...
Namely around the language of what creates a derivative / combined work:
LGPL was intended for languages that use header files, like C and C++. So, if a project was ever accused of creating a combined work, they'd be on the hook to defend the the case, whether or not a combined work is created. In v2, the license even shifts the question onto licensee/licensor: "The threshold for this to be true is not precisely defined by law."
In licenses such as BSD/MIT/ISC/etc. these issues do not arise, and a breeze through top python projects show reciprocal contributions and access to source are commonplace without viral clauses in licenses.
I write about LGPL/python at length before here (2013): https://github.com/ScottDuckworth/python-anyvcs/issues/32#is... and (2016) https://github.com/PyGithub/PyGithub/issues/468#issuecomment...
For gaming, it's even more relevant, because if the deployment is to steam or a mobile phone (like what kivy does with https://github.com/kivy/python-for-android), that could easily be interpreted as a combined work. They're not like C/C++ application linking to .so / shared libraries.