Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

We will want to move Emacs to GPL version 3 soon after that comes out.
First we need to check the licenses of the various libraries (other
than libc) that Emacs links with, and make sure that they are
compatible with GPL version 3.  

If some libraries are incompatible, that won't prevent the upgrade,
but we need to know about them in order to do the upgrade properly.

Would someone please volunteer to check this?

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Alexandre Vassalotti]

On 6/26/07, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
> We will want to move Emacs to GPL version 3 soon after that comes out.
> First we need to check the licenses of the various libraries (other
> than libc) that Emacs links with, and make sure that they are
> compatible with GPL version 3.
>
> If some libraries are incompatible, that won't prevent the upgrade,
> but we need to know about them in order to do the upgrade properly.
>
> Would someone please volunteer to check this?

I did a quick search for files that don't include "either version 2,
or (at your option) any later version." The only ones have found were
either 1) in the public domain, 2) automatically generated, or 3)
without the standard license header (but, these are all copyrighted by
the Free Software Foundation).

That is the commands I used for my quick search:

  $ find -name *.c -or -name *.el -print > all
  $ find -name *.c -or -name *.el -print0 | xargs -0 grep -l "version
2, or" > license.ok
  $ for f in `diff -u all license.ok | body -s2 | grep "^-" | sed 's/^-//'`
do less $f; done

I hope that helps,
-- Alexandre

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

Thank you for checking this, but what we really need to check is not
the code of Emacs itself.  We need to check the licensing of the
libraries that Emacs can be linked with.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Alexandre Vassalotti]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2934 bytes --]

On 6/28/07, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
> Thank you for checking this, but what we really need to check is not
> the code of Emacs itself.  We need to check the licensing of the
> libraries that Emacs can be linked with.
>

Yes, indeed. I misread your initial email. Anyway, here a summary of
the licenses of the libraries linked to the GTK+ version of Emacs. All
GPL-like licenses had the "or later version" clause. Most modified MIT
X11 licenses, just have a notice similar to the following added:

   Except as contained in this notice, the name(s) of the above
   copyright holders shall not be used in advertising or otherwise
   to promote the sale, use or other dealings in this Software
   without prior written authorization.

I attached the small script, I used, to check the licenses quickly of
the libraries on a Debian-based system.

-- Alexandre

libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0           => GPLv2
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0           => GPLv2
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0        => GPLv2
libm.so.6                     => LGPLv2.1
libm.so.6                     => LGPLv2.1
libfontconfig.so.1            => Modified MIT X11
libX11.so.6                   => MIT X11
libgobject-2.0.so.0           => LGPL
lib-2.0.so.0                  => LGPLv2
lib-2.0.so.0                  => LGPLv2
lib-2.0.so.0                  => LGPLv2
lib-2.0.so.0                  => LGPL
libpthread.so.0               => LGPLv2.1
libpthread.so.0               => LGPLv2.1
libSM.so.6                    => Modified MIT X11
libICE.so.6                   => Modified MIT X11
libtiff.so.4                  => Modified MIT X11
libjpeg.so.62                 => Modified MIT X11
libpng12.so.0                 => Modified MIT X11
libungif.so.4                 => MIT X11
libXpm.so.4                   => Modified MIT X11
libXft.so.2                   => Modified MIT X11
libasound.so.2                => LGPLv2.1
libncurses.so.5               => Modified MIT X11
libc.so.6                     => LGPLv2.1
libc.so.6                     => LGPLv2.1
libfreetype.so.6              => Dual GPLv2 + FreeType
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0        => GPLv2
libpango-1.0.so.0             => GPLv2
libXfixes.so.3                => Modified MIT X11
libatk-1.0.so.0               => GPLv2
libgmodule-2.0.so.0           => LGPLv2
libdl.so.2                    => LGPLv2.1
libdl.so.2                    => LGPLv2.1
libcairo.so.2                 => Modified MIT X11
libXext.so.6                  => Modified MIT X11
libXrender.so.1               => Modified MIT X11
libXinerama.so.1              => Modified MIT X11
libXi.so.6                    => Modified MIT X11
libXrandr.so.2                => Modified MIT X11
libXcursor.so.1               => Modified MIT X11
libz.so.1                     => zlib
libexpat.so.1                 => Modified MIT X11
libXau.so.6                   => Modified MIT X11
libXdmcp.so.6                 => Modified MIT X11
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0          => LGPLv2

[-- Attachment #2: check-licenses.sh --]
[-- Type: application/x-sh, Size: 421 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

    libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0           => GPLv2

Is it released under GPL version 2,
or under GPL version 2 or later?

    libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0           => GPLv2
    libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0        => GPLv2

Same question.

For each library that uses the GPL or LGPL, the same question
needs to be answered.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Yavor Doganov]

[ A few minutes before sending this message, I saw that Alexandre
Vassalotti already did what's necessary -- nevertheless, my list might
be usefeful as a compatison.  Sorry for the noise. ]

Richard Stallman wrote:
> First we need to check the licenses of the various libraries (other
> than libc) that Emacs links with [...]

Here is a probably inaccurate/incomplete list obtained on a gNewSense
GNU/Linux system with the snippet

$ P=/usr/bin ; for f in $P/emacs-snapshot $P/emacs-snapshot-gtk \ 
  $P/emacs-snapshot-nox ; do ldd $f ; done | sort | uniq -w 10 

(emacs-snapshot being Emacs from CVS trunk 25 Jun.  The only change
compared to EMACS_22_BASE is libgpm, if I'm not wrong.)

Where "GPL-compatible" is indicated in brackets, it is my personal
non-educated opinion; the license text is included in a footnote.
(Maybe I should have skipped the long annoying list of similar
non-copyleft licenses -- my apologies.)
Where the separator `/' is used, the library is dual-licensed.

Library	    		   License
==========================================================
libasound		   LGPLv2.1 or later
libatk			   LGPLv2 or later
libcairo		   LGPLv2/MPLv1.1
libexpat		   Expat License
libfontconfig		   Custom (GPL-compatible) [1]
libfreetype		   GPLv2 or later/FreeType License
libgtk			   LGPLv2 or later
libglib			   LGPLv2 or later
libgpm			   GPLv2 or later
libICE			   X11 License
libjpeg			   Custom (GPL-compatible) [2]
libncurses		   X11 License
libpango		   LGPLv2 or later
libpng			   Custom (GPL-compatible) [3]
libSM			   X11 License
libtiff			   Custom (GPL-compatible) [4]
libgif, libungif	   Expat License
libX11			   X11 License+a bunch of non-copyleft licenses
libXau			   X11 License
libXaw3d		   X11 License
libXcursor		   Same as fontonfig [1]
libXext			   X11 License
libXfixes		   Same as fontconfig [1]
libXft			   Same as fontconfig [1]
libXinerama		   X11 License
libXi			   X11 License
libXmu			   X11 License
libXpm			   X11 License
libXrandr		   Custom (GPL-compatible) [5]
libXrender		   Same as fontconfig [1]
libXt			   X11 License
libz			   License of ZLib


[1] fontconfig license:

Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software
and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that
both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in
supporting documentation, and that the name of Keith Packard not be
used in advertising or publicity pertaining to distribution of the
software without specific, written prior permission.  Keith Packard
makes no representations about the suitability of this software for
any purpose.  It is provided "as is" without express or implied
warranty.

KEITH PACKARD DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE,
INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS, IN NO
EVENT SHALL KEITH PACKARD BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF
USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR
PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

[2] libjpeg license:

The authors make NO WARRANTY or representation, either express or
implied, with respect to this software, its quality, accuracy,
merchantability, or fitness for a particular purpose.  This software
is provided "AS IS", and you, its user, assume the entire risk as to
its quality and accuracy.

This software is copyright (C) 1991-1998, Thomas G. Lane.
All Rights Reserved except as specified below.

Permission is hereby granted to use, copy, modify, and distribute this
software (or portions thereof) for any purpose, without fee, subject
to these conditions:
(1) If any part of the source code for this software is distributed,
then this README file must be included, with this copyright and
no-warranty notice unaltered; and any additions, deletions, or changes
to the original files must be clearly indicated in accompanying
documentation.
(2) If only executable code is distributed, then the accompanying
documentation must state that "this software is based in part on the
work of the Independent JPEG Group".
(3) Permission for use of this software is granted only if the user
accepts full responsibility for any undesirable consequences; the
authors accept NO LIABILITY for damages of any kind.

These conditions apply to any software derived from or based on the
IJG code, not just to the unmodified library.  If you use our work,
you ought to acknowledge us.

Permission is NOT granted for the use of any IJG author's name or
company name in advertising or publicity relating to this software or
products derived from it.  This software may be referred to only as
"the Independent JPEG Group's software".

We specifically permit and encourage the use of this software as the
basis of commercial products, provided that all warranty or liability
claims are assumed by the product vendor.

[3] libpng license (various weird disclaimers omitted):

The PNG Reference Library is supplied "AS IS".  The Contributing
Authors and Group 42, Inc. disclaim all warranties, expressed or
implied, including, without limitation, the warranties of
merchantability and of fitness for any purpose.  The Contributing
Authors and Group 42, Inc.  assume no liability for direct, indirect,
incidental, special, exemplary, or consequential damages, which may
result from the use of the PNG Reference Library, even if advised of
the possibility of such damage.

Permission is hereby granted to use, copy, modify, and distribute this
source code, or portions hereof, for any purpose, without fee, subject
to the following restrictions:

1. The origin of this source code must not be misrepresented.

2. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such and must not
   be misrepresented as being the original source.

3. This Copyright notice may not be removed or altered from any
   source or altered source distribution.

The Contributing Authors and Group 42, Inc. specifically permit,
without fee, and encourage the use of this source code as a component
to supporting the PNG file format in commercial products.  If you use
this source code in a product, acknowledgment is not required but
would be appreciated.

[4] libtiff license:

Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software
and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
provided that (i) the above copyright notices and this permission
notice appear in all copies of the software and related documentation,
and (ii) the names of Sam Leffler and Silicon Graphics may not be used
in any advertising or publicity relating to the software without the
specific, prior written permission of Sam Leffler and Silicon
Graphics.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS-IS" AND WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY
WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

IN NO EVENT SHALL SAM LEFFLER OR SILICON GRAPHICS BE LIABLE FOR ANY
SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, OR
ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS,
WHETHER OR NOT ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGE, AND ON ANY THEORY
OF LIABILITY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR
PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

[5] libXrandr license:

Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software
and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that
both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in
supporting documentation, and that the name of Compaq or HP not be
used in advertising or publicity pertaining to distribution of the
software without specific, written prior permission.  HP makes no
representations about the suitability of this software for any
purpose.  It is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty.

HP DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE, INCLUDING
ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS, IN NO EVENT
SHALL HP BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS,
WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION,
ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS
SOFTWARE.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

    libcairo		   LGPLv2/MPLv1.1

Is that really only LGPL version 2?  That would be a problem.
(The rest of the libraries are not a problem.)

If that is the case, could you tell me what libcairo does?
Also, the names and email addresses of its main developers?

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Yavor Doganov]

Richard Stallman wrote:
> 
>     libcairo		   LGPLv2/MPLv1.1
> 
> Is that really only LGPL version 2? 

Yes, unfortunately.

> If that is the case, could you tell me what libcairo does?

It is a core 2D graphics library, GTK+ depends on it.

> Also, the names and email addresses of its main developers?

Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> is the main maintainer.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Yavor Doganov]

Явор Доганов wrote:
> Richard Stallman wrote:
> > 
> > Is that really only LGPL version 2? 
> 
> Yes, unfortunately.

Correction: latest stable releases are under LGPLv2.1.  It shouldn't
be a problem.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

Since libcairo uses LGPL version 2.1, I just checked LGPL version 2.1
again.  It says that newer GPL versions can be used.  So there is in
fact no problen with libcairo.

Therefore there is no obstacle to relicensing Emacs immediatelky.  We
just need someone to volunteer to do the work.  We should do the trunk
and all the branches that are considered live, but we don't have to
do all the branches at once.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Stefan Monnier]

> Since libcairo uses LGPL version 2.1, I just checked LGPL version 2.1
> again.  It says that newer GPL versions can be used.  So there is in
> fact no problen with libcairo.

> Therefore there is no obstacle to relicensing Emacs immediatelky.  We
> just need someone to volunteer to do the work.  We should do the trunk
> and all the branches that are considered live, but we don't have to
> do all the branches at once.

I think we should start with the release branch.
Since it's then sync'd to the trunk which is sync'd to the unicode branch,
that seems like the best starting place to avoid duplicated work.


        Stefan

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Jeremy Maitin-Shepard]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     libcairo		   LGPLv2/MPLv1.1
> Is that really only LGPL version 2?  That would be a problem.
> (The rest of the libraries are not a problem.)

Isn't the very fact that it is licensed under LGPLv2 sufficient to make
it compatible?

-- 
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

> We will want to move Emacs to GPL version 3 soon after that comes out.

Just a reminder that when we went through the copyright exercise
earlier in the year, it seemed to be the case that some of the images
included in Emacs from Gnome/GTK were under GPLv2 (no "or later").
Someone may wish to re-check these.

Seems to only affect (see READMEs) some files in: etc/images,
etc/images/gnus, etc/images/mail.

(I see many GNU projects have made new releases with the new license.
Will Emacs do this?)

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00397.html

"Copyrights to be fixed", emacs-devel, 2007/02/08.

rms:

  Is it really only version 2? If so, we may have to replace them in
  order to move Emacs to GPL version 3.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

    Just a reminder that when we went through the copyright exercise
    earlier in the year, it seemed to be the case that some of the images
    included in Emacs from Gnome/GTK were under GPLv2 (no "or later").
    Someone may wish to re-check these.

There is no legal conflict about the license of an image that Emacs
merely displays, so this is not a barrier to relicensing.  However, it
is not a good thing that GNOME images are licensed this way.

Can you tell me the specific file names of one or two of these images,
and where they come from in GNOME?

I don't need a complete list, just a couple of examples, fully
described.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

[I sent this message a few weeks ago but did not get a response.
Could we get the discussion moving again?]

    Just a reminder that when we went through the copyright exercise
    earlier in the year, it seemed to be the case that some of the images
    included in Emacs from Gnome/GTK were under GPLv2 (no "or later").
    Someone may wish to re-check these.

There is no legal conflict about the license of an image that Emacs
merely displays, so this is not a barrier to relicensing.  However, it
is not a good thing that GNOME images are licensed this way.

Can you tell me the specific file names of one or two of these images,
and where they come from in GNOME?

I don't need a complete list, just a couple of examples, fully
described.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Glenn Morris]

Richard Stallman wrote:

> [I sent this message a few weeks ago but did not get a response.
> Could we get the discussion moving again?]

I've been on holiday and it seems no-one else wished to reply.

> Can you tell me the specific file names of one or two of these images,
> and where they come from in GNOME?
>
> I don't need a complete list, just a couple of examples, fully
> described.

It wasn't me who identified the license for the gnome icons initially.
Indeed, I can't find a clear statement about the copyright and license
for the gnome icons anywhere.

Emacs contains some icons taken from "gnome-icon-theme". Some specific
examples (as described in our etc/images/README file):

Emacs icon                gnome-icon-theme source
etc/images/attach         document/stock_attach
etc/images/delete         generic/stock_delete
etc/images/lock           data/stock_lock

The gnome-icon-theme source can be downloaded from

http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/gnome-icon-theme/

The tarballs contain a copy of GPLv2, but I cannot see an actual
copyright statement or a note about which version(s) of the license
apply anywhere in the source. Nor can I find this information in the
gnome VC repository. So basically, I have no idea what the copyright
for gnome icons is.

On a Debian system, /usr/share/doc/gnome-icon-theme/copyright says
that the license is "version 2" (no "or later"). This is the only
information I can find as to what the actual gnome icons license is.

Re: Relicensing Emacs to GPLv3

[Richard Stallman]

Thanks.