From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: persistent lisp objects Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:13 -0400 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1254690214 10569 80.91.229.12 (4 Oct 2009 21:03:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 21:03:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: MON KEY Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 04 23:03:27 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MuYEn-0005Ky-Io for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 23:03:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51206 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MuYEn-0007yK-IZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MuYEh-0007vI-KA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:19 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MuYEc-0007n8-Pn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34083 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MuYEc-0007mx-Mv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:41055) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MuYEc-0002ll-8p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:14 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1MuYEb-00045L-Vl; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:14 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from MON KEY on Sat, 3 Oct 2009 20:15:27 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:115903 Archived-At: > The copyright on compiler output follows the copyright on the input > that was compiled. In other words, the copyright holder of the input > also has the copyright on the output. So, if the output produced of the compiler originates by a method dispatched on a subclassed object it would be under GPL? I do not follow you. I am not sure what scenario you mean. There are two questions here (and in any such case): who holds the copyright, and whether there is any constraint on the license that the copyright holder can release under. What I spoke about is who holds the copyright. What of cases where one or more methods so specialized act in concert to snarf data from some other source(s) where these sources are extraneous to the local handlers - e.g. the GPL'd objects/methods? data -> object -> method -> compiled-output That is very abstract. It is hard to consider these issues in the abstract. Only a concrete scenario has all the details that affect the answer.