However, this doesn't apply to LGPL, and is typically why reusable things like Ren'Py are not distributed under GPL, they actually choose LGPL so it can be incorporated into commercial works. If they didn't, too many people would choose to use another product as they couldn't have control of their own works.
Well, thing is LGPL allows proprietary software to use libraries licensed under it, but proprietary software has to be separated. That's why most of such software actually uses system wide shared libraries. If they ship said libraries with software, then it qualifies as derivative work, and by letter of LGPL cant be copyrighted. If you take any RenPy game, it has said libraries shipped with it, under libs. It doesn't use system wide shared libraries.
Basically all that is required in this case is the developer must distribute or make available the source code of the LGPL product (i.e. Ren'Py). None of this applies to the derivative work and their original work, it just applies to Ren'Py.
RenPy is not LGPL licensed, it's licensed under MIT, yet for purpose of LGPL, it's derivative work of LGPL, and precisely because of it, all requirements of LGPL have to be met. Actually, RenPy
You must be registered to see the links
about it.
Portions of Ren'Py are derived from source code that is licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License, so Ren'Py games must be distributed in a manner that satisfies the LGPL.
RenPy games, are RenpPy, not product of it, but RenPy which runs series of pictures and text.
Also your suggestion that they "can't copyright it" is totally false,
What they can copyright?
Characters? I am not sure they can.
Their code contributions? It's already open sourced. IE, it's enough to decompile rpc and rpa files, and you can see everything, reverse engineer and what's not. Not to mention it's shipped and cant work without LGPL libraries.
Story... well yes. But it has to be separated in order to
licenses cannot override a person's right to copyright in their work, it's happens automatically, including for derivative works. Wherein someone has a restriction because of incorporating LGPL or GPL code into their work, they always retain the copyright to their original work and they can always rip out Ren'Py and produce a new work without it.
Well, yes, but if they extract their own work from , there is no the game. Why somebody of those actually making a lot of money, like Summertime Saga or ICSTOR never tried to claim copyright?
PS; for automatic part. I already wrote about it. Berne convention does not mention software, not surprisingly as it's legal document of XIX century. Some countries, like US or Germany, interpret software as literary works, but it's applicable only in those countries. That's actually how piracy works, as soon as software is not linked with US DMCA complaints are simply ignored, but I digress here.
