Re: License of code posted to this list

[Urs Liska]

Am 9. Mai 2015 22:55:32 MESZ, schrieb David Bellows <address@hidden>:
>> Sorry about not contacting you sooner!
>
>It's perfectly OK! I'm sure I'm just way over-thinking the issue!
>
>> I'm more than happy to let you use the "auto-ottava" code for your
>project.  By posting it on this forum I make it available to anybody
>who sees utility in it.
>
>I think that probably works. I can just add that to the top of the
>file.

I'm not sure so this maybe wrong. But AFAIK copyright for content posted to the 
list is by default with the author and has 

Ursno license by itself. So I think you can't assume it's PD.

>
>> My concern (and consequent hesitation in answering) is simply that,
>should I or someone else decide incorporate it in the LilyPond code
>base in the future, there would be no complication.
>
>Lilypond uses the GPL and can make use of code licensed to the public
>domain (anyone can use public domain code with any license for any
>purpose). https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLUSGovAdd I
>think applies.
>
>> You mention that your software is Affero GPL.  Would this conflict in
>any way with LilyPond's license?
>
>Nope. In fact version 3 of the GPL (the version that Lilypond uses)
>specifically mentions that it can be used with stuff licensed with the
>Affero GPL. The "Affero" clause was intended to close a potential
>loophole concerning web applications and otherwise uses the exact same
>wording as the GPL and is maintained by the FSF
>(http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html).
>
>On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 1:37 PM, David Nalesnik
><address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hi David.
>>
>> On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 3:17 PM, David Bellows <address@hidden>
>wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I have a big coding project that generates Lilypond files to be
>>> processed by Lilypond in an external process. My software is GPL. I
>>> make use of a couple of scripts that were produced on this list but
>>> have not been uploaded to the LSR. They are significant enough that
>I
>>> would consider them of concern when thinking about licensing issues.
>>>
>>> I've contacted the authors in each of these cases asking them to add
>>> license information to these scripts but so far I haven't heard back
>>> from them.
>>>
>>> OK, that's how these things go, but since things like this can come
>up
>>> again I was wondering if anyone has a knowledgeable opinion on the
>>> state of code posted to a mail list like this? Is it automatically
>>> public domain and so I don't need any additional licensing from the
>>> original authors?
>>>
>>> Does it make a difference if the scripts were derived from code from
>the
>>> LSR?
>>
>>
>> Sorry about not contacting you sooner!
>>
>> I'm more than happy to let you use the "auto-ottava" code for your
>project.
>> By posting it on this forum I make it available to anybody who sees
>utility
>> in it.
>>
>> My concern (and consequent hesitation in answering) is simply that,
>should I
>> or someone else decide incorporate it in the LilyPond code base in
>the
>> future, there would be no complication.
>>
>> You mention that your software is Affero GPL.  Would this conflict in
>any
>> way with LilyPond's license?
>>
>> Best,
>> David
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>lilypond-user mailing list
>address@hidden
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user