[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL
From: |
Karsten Reincke |
Subject: |
Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Oct 2019 11:53:40 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Evolution 3.34.1-2 |
On Wed, 2019-10-30 at 01:36 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Karsten Reincke <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > Hence, if I use a piece of software as library, snippet, or module,
> > then I am using the advantage that I do not have to program that code
> > by myself. I am saving costs and time. A very good indicator, that I am
> > saving resources by using the prework of another programer, is the call
> > of a function (or method or similar). Therefore, calling a function /
> > method delivered by a GPL licensed software indicates that I create a
> > derivative work and that the strong copyleft effect is triggered.
>
> Which would imply that distributing your LilyPond input combined with
> OpenLilylib code would require licensing your LilyPond input under the
> GPL.
Yes, exactly. That's my point.
>
> It doesn't cover the output of running your LilyPond code, namely the
> PDF.
I am afraid that this statement does judicially not hold:
LilyPond itself says that it works "[...] as a compiled system: [...] In some
ways, LilyPond is more similar to a programming language [...]". Hence the
viewpoint of Carl Sorensen seems to be valid: LilyPond is like the gcc. And even
in case of the gcc, the copyleft effect does not cover the outpout (the compiled
program).
But in case of a GPL licensed LilyPond snippet (sic!), the copyleft effetc is
triggered by the use of that snippet. And the GPLv3 is very clear: §4 and §5
require us also to distribute the code of the embedding / using work under the
terms of th GPL. And - under the title "Conveying Non-Source Forms" - §6
requires
us also to distribute our non-source forms under the terms of the GPL.
Here, the analogy of gcc and Lilypond matches perfectly: As we are must
distribute
binaries which are compiled by the gcc on the base a GPL licensed source code,
we
must also distribute the binaries (png) which are compiled by LilyPond on the
base
of a GPL licensed LilyPond score description. It is exactly the same case.
I regret to be the messenger of bad news. But there is a simple solution: Don't
use GPL licensed LilyPond snippets, if wou want to keep you rights. And perhaps
convince the OpenLilyLib developers to relicense their work.
with best reagards Karsten
--
Karsten Reincke /\/\ (+49|0) 170 / 927 78 57
Im Braungeröll 31 >oo< mailto:address@hidden
60431 Frankfurt a.M. \/ http://www.fodina.de/kr/
- LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Karsten Reincke, 2019/10/29
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, David Kastrup, 2019/10/29
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Karsten Reincke, 2019/10/29
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, David Kastrup, 2019/10/29
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL,
Karsten Reincke <=
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, David Kastrup, 2019/10/30
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, mason, 2019/10/30
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Karsten Reincke, 2019/10/30
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Carl Sorensen, 2019/10/30
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, mason, 2019/10/30
Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Carl Sorensen, 2019/10/29
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Karsten Reincke, 2019/10/30
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, David Kastrup, 2019/10/30
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Henning Hraban Ramm, 2019/10/30
- Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL, Karsten Reincke, 2019/10/30