lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL


From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 18:51:00 -0500


On Apr 2, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 04/02/2013 11:38 PM, Anthonys Lists wrote:
>> On 02/04/2013 22:01, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
>>> (Function names and APIs are generally considered to be uncopyrightable.)
>>> However, I think the consensus of opinion about free software licensing 
>>> would
>>> be that, in distributing to you this little program, purely in source code
>>> form, not compiled or linked in any way, I am still obliged to offer it to 
>>> you
>>> under licensing terms that are GPL-compatible, or else lose my right to use
>>> the GNU Scientific Library.
>> 
>> You've just answered your own question. You have just said that this program
>> does NOT contain ANY copyrighted content from the gsl.
>> 
>> As such, it is not a derivative work. That's what the law says. If the gsl
>> people want to stop you using their library, they need the law on their side.
> 
> My right to use the GNU Scientific Library is conditional on following certain
> obligations -- if I breach those obligations, I lose the right to use the GNU
> Scientific Library.  One such obligation relates to the licensing that must be
> applied if I distribute any work that matches the GPL definition of a "covered
> work".

This would be overreaching and probably unenforceable from the legal 
perspective.
> It's no different in principle from what happens if I breach the terms of use 
> of
> a proprietary program.  My right to use the Flash plugin, for example, is
> conditional among other things upon my not trying to reverse-engineer it.
> 
> Of course, in the case of the GNU Scientific Library, one way I could avoid
> violating the license would be to prepare a clean-room re-implementation of 
> the
> library for use with my program.  But in the absence of such a
> re-implementation, I think I'd reasonably be held in violation.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]