Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Lucius Hu <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-01 20:45]:
> This is my take on the nature of Spacemacs.
> 
> - First it's not "modifying emacs on the fly", nor does it change
> - source code of emacs. Because clearly it doesn't require you to
> - compile a modified version of emacs.

Well, I do not see the classic Emacs when I run it. So the programs
contained in Spacemacs package create modified work. Maybe you think
with "not modifying Emacs on the fly" that it does not modify the
OS executable on the fly. Your software is written in Emacs Lisp (how
I see it) and is modified work of original.

Compiling or not compiling is not essential. It is Emacs Lisp. No need
to compile

> - It's a framework for setting up common workflows easily in emacs.

Sure, I understand. However, the framework, call it as you wish, is
new Emacs distribution. It depends of main Emacs, otherwise alone it
does nothing. That is why it is new work.

> - A core library is mostly from original work of contributors of
> - Spacemacs. Sure their license info is not complete and needs to be
> - improved.

Thanks for acknowledgments. As it directly uses mainstream Emacs to
provide new Emacs version (remember, compiled or not is not essential
as Emacs Lisp libraries are all part of Emacs) -- then all those files
have to be licensed with same license as Emacs.

> - Layer configs declare 3rd-party packages and set some sane
> - defaults. They are not modifying any source code either.

I understand your opinion. My opinion is that it is not mere an
aggregate work, it depends on mainstream Emacs. Adding to the source
code is modification of the original source code. It is also visibly
not the same appearance so that demonstrates the modification. It does
not matter if it pulls third party packages, all those packages
including Spacemacs should be then compliant.

Could you please write your email to emacs-tangents@gnu.org and
include your opinion. I will send this copy to that mailing list as
well. Please participate there as the subject was brought up in the
mailing list. It would be so nice to have all pieces of Spacemacs with
nice notices so that people may build more free software upon it.

>  - There are some functions that wraps around functions from
>  - 3rd-party packages, but again they are not modifying the
>  - source. Calling a external library is not modifying source.

Please review:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

Read for example this section:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WMS

Where it says: " Because the templates will be combined with user
data, it's possible that template+user data+JavaScript would be
considered one work under copyright law."

Also see this section:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLPlugins

I suggest you discuss it on emacs-tangents@gnu.org

Please see:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-tangents/2021-02/msg00002.html

and follow the thread.

> - In a few cases, we pulled in the source of remote package
> - entirely, with or without modifications. But the original license
> - info inside those packages are kept intact.

It does not matter. I see your viewpoint, but I see you lack
understanding of what combined work is. You would get better
assistance on mailing list emacs-tangents@gnu.org where you can write
now, without subscribing.

In my opinion the points that I have presented in the previous
comments still stand.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Lucius Hu <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-01 22:33]:

> > So the programs contained in Spacemacs package create modified
> work. Maybe you think with "not modifying Emacs on the fly" that it
> does not modify the OS executable on the fly. Your software is
> written in Emacs Lisp (how I see it) and is modified work of
> original.
> 
> Point to a source file of emacs that is modified.
> 
> > Compiling or not compiling is not essential. It is Emacs Lisp. No need
> to compile
> 
> This is hilarious. Anyone with elementary knowledge of how
> interpreter works knows that the program needs to be compiled.

We speak of the work in copyright terms.

It does not matter how you call it, you can call it framework,
configuration, etc. It does not matter because I have not spoken of
technicalities or classification of type of software.

What matters is that it is new package, new work, new software.

It really does not matter if you modify C sources or you add Emacs
Lisp, you have made the work. It is nice work. It is combination of
various other works and Spacemacs programs.

Thus it is new work in copyright terms.

> > As it directly uses mainstream Emacs to
> provide new Emacs version
> 
> What are you talking about? Where is the new emacs?

Emacs Lisp code is modifying the original Emacs.

Emacs Lisp code in original Emacs is part of Emacs.

Look inside of Emacs Lisp code distributed with Emacs to understand.

> > It is also visibly not the same appearance so that demonstrates
> the modification.
> 
> Following your definition, if you change the wallpaper, colortheme,
> etc of an operating system, you are considered to modify the
> OS. This is just nonsense.

I have not been speaking of the OS and I do not know how is this
relevant, but here are my comments for you.

If user changes a wallpaper, user did not write software and did not
distribute software. It is not relevant to copyright.

If a color theme is changed and it is not software, that is user's
option to change it.

If however a color theme is software and user decides to publish it,
and that software runs with GNU Emacs, then such should be published
with the appropriate license compatible with GNU GPLv3. The copyright
notice must be placed properly in the file of the color theme.

Spacemacs files do not have proper copyright notices, could you please
look into that issue as that is one practical thing you can improve,
it impacts users of Spacemacs and helps them understand the licensing.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* dpsutton <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-01 22:36]:
> I have my own init for emacs publicly available. It, as well as this
> repo, does not contain any emacs code. Is it the position of GNU
> that emacs inits cannot hide or modify the splash screen?

I do not know what is position of GNU, as I do not represent GNU
project.

However, GNU project got notice on the mailing list about licensing of
Spacemacs and that is why I have brought the message from the Emacs
Tangents to the Github issue.

Classification of software is separate from the copyright. If the
init.el is distributed and modifies Emacs, it creates new combined
work and thus should be properly licensed. That somebody calls it
"init" is not relevant to copyrights.

Programmers and users may call and classify software as they wish.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Dmitry Gutov <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-02 00:03]:
> The report might still have merit, but I kind of doubt it. Otherwise
> we venture into "cannot distribute my own user configuration
> publicly" territory.

That is definitely interesting observation.

It is related to copyrights, not quite technicalities.

init.el files run with Emacs, so when distributed IMHO such files
represent combined work in terms of copyrights. init.el is not just
single file that runs in itself alone. Thus it has to carry proper
copyright license as it is combined and dependent of Emacs.

How you call it, be it "init" or something else, it is your
classification of software.

We do not speak of how software is classified, we speak of copyrights.

You can distribute your program without copyright notice, but that
does not make it free software. It may also collide with the GNU GPLv3
because if program is dependent of Emacs and modifies Emacs than it is
not in compliance with the license.

If your program runs let us say some processing that do not modify
Emacs, then I guess it could be proprietary as well. For example if
your program processes some data, like making websites in a batch
mode, I guess it could be proprietary.

If it however opens up the interactive user interface and provides M-x
commands that modifies Emacs and the license shall be GNU GPLv3 (or
maybe compatible one).

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Ilya Grigoriev <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-02 06:11]:
> I think @gnusupport is under the impression that the Spacemacs
> distribution includes GNU Emacs. This was not my experience -- to
> run Spacemacs, I had to obtain GNU emacs separately.  I don't
> believe there is any of the releases in
> https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/releases contain any portion
> of GNU Emacs (or, at least, they shouldn't), and there's no way for
> a user to run Spacemacs using those files without obtaining GNU
> emacs separately.

> However, if there is a Spacemacs distribution on the website or
> elsewhere that DOES include GNU Emacs, @gnusupport may have a point.

For copyright law it does not matter where are other parts of the
combined work located. You said it well, Spacemacs depends on
Emacs. Thus Spacemacs together with Emacs creates combined work.

Please read the GNU GPLv3:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/

Spacemacs is not mere an aggregate:

" A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent
works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work,
and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program,
in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an
"aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not
used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users
beyond what the individual works permit.  Inclusion of a covered work
in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other
parts of the aggregate."

- Spacemacs is extension to Emacs

- Spacemacs is combined with Emacs to form larger program

Thus Spacemacs is not merely an aggregate. I have given already
references to it in previous comments.

It really does not matter how other parts of the combined work are
pulled, fetched, from where, packaged, or not packaged together. They
can be apart. There is so much other software that is fetching from
other places other parts of software.

That fact of fetching other software does not exclude it from placing
proper licensing notices or complying to GPLv3.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Eli-Zaretskii <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-03 09:43]:
> @gnusupport, I really don't understand what is the problem you are
> raising here.  The Spacemacs page says the code is distributed under
> GPLv3, so where's the problem?

Problem that I see arises from the GNU GPLv3 and I have referenced it
already. Here we go again:

Please see "5. Conveying Modified Source Versions."

1. Full license text file is missing in the distribution.

2. Source files do not have proper license notices. "GPLv3" is not enough. 

3. Somewhere in the interactive interface you could add short notice.

> @lebensterben, why doesn't the code include a file named `COPYING`
> or `LICENSE` or somesuch, which would say explicitly that the
> license is GPL?  Or does such a file exist and I missed it?

Yesterday I have seen in Github repository, such file did not exist.

The three points above remain unhandled.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Lucius Hu <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-02 18:10]:
> Why would the user don't know?
> Or is there any description of Spacemacs says it's not a configuration but a modified version of Emacs?

Descriptions are in terms of copyright not really relevant.

Classification like naming such as "configuration" is also not
relevant.

Question is if it represents combined work and thus modified version
of Emacs as visually and practically it represents modified version of
Emacs. It is not relevant that code was added to it, and that some
sources were not "changed" directly. The modification of software is
taking place in adding that new code. 

IMHO it represents combined work, new modified work thus the section
"5. Conveying Modified Source Versions." applies:

1. TODO Full license text file is missing in the distribution.

2. TODO Source files do not have proper license notices. "GPLv3" is
   not enough. This is not even related to the section 5 but to
   general application of GNU GPLv3 license, and Spacemacs authors
   with to license it as GPLv3 but just need to place proper notices
   in each source files.

3. TODO Somewhere in the interactive interface you could add short
   copyright notice, something like "Copying Conditions" in accordance
   with the section 5.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* vemv <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-02 21:43]:
> > as myself **I may not be sure** of each detail. I have already stated the details, but you maybe did not pick it up.
> 
> > From my side I have downloaded the package and run it by instructions. So in my opinion the pacakge runs together with Emacs software and modifies on the fly Emacs, so **in my opinion** it forms new work
> 
> (emphasis mine)
> 
> Without pointing out to specifics, you're basically asking everyone else do to the work that you admit to be skipping. That is not only unfair, but also rude and lacking a legal basis. Specifically, an 'opinion' is not a legal basis.

Please assume good faith.

I have pointed out issues in good faith.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Lucius Hu <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-03 09:19]:
> > Emacs Lisp code is modifying the original Emacs.
> 
> So if one writes shell script is he modifying the shell? Or when I
> program on my proprietary programmable calculator, am I modifying
> the calculator and therefore violated the copyright of its
> manufacture?

Spacemacs is not shell script that does something separate for itself
separate from Emacs as editor and environment.

If one writes a shell script that modifies the behavior of Bash shell,
and distributes such in public, then such shell script becomes new
combined work that modified Bash and is modified work.

When you program on your proprietary programmable calculator, that
issue is not related to free software, especially not because you have
not say that you are distributing it.

> > Spacemacs files do not have proper copyright notices, could you please
> look into that issue as that is one practical thing you can improve,
> it impacts users of Spacemacs and helps them understand the licensing.
> 
> No. I don't like stupid people. Stop your balderdash and get off this repository.

That is unfortunate to see such statement.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Eli-Zaretskii <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-03 10:47]:
> So if Spacemacs adds a `COPYING` file which is GPLv3, and adds the
> missing copyright notices to the files it provides, the problem is
> solved, right?

License in the distribution should be there, of course.

But each source file has to have copyright notice as how it is
explained in the license as that will give clear information to people
that software is free software and that there is no warranties.

Stating only "GPLv3" means nothing in itself, and implies that
receiver is supposed to know what it the license. It is unclear for
the end receiver of the software.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Lucius Hu <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-03 20:07]:
> @thanhvg 
> Code snippets you found online are usually `unlicensed` and you can
> adapt those into your codebase, with the following exceptions:

> - If the (apparent) author claims that it's licensed, then you should check the license compatibility.
> - If the hosting website claims it owns the copyright or the
> - contents on its website is under a specific license, then you also
> - need to check the compatibility.

That is absolutely incorrect.

Any works are automatically protected unless author has some different
licensing terms.

When some work is there without license that means it is protected by
copyright laws and thus proprietary. It becomes free software only if
explicitly stated so.

Please see the question answered related to US copyrights:
https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html

Where it says:

"Do I have to register with your office to be protected?

No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the
moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you
wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular
1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration.” "

Thus when work is created, be it piece of text, software, paintings,
image, the copyright exists from the moment work is created. Without
explicitly licensing it as free software it is not free and thus
cannot just be copied and pasted as somebody wish and want.

In the end that spoils the GNU GPL licensed free software with
proprietary software for which one have never got permission.

> In general, if it's unlicensed you just need to include the link to
> the original page/author.

That is incorrect. See above.

While in US it is recommended to register copyrights, it exists just
as in all other countries automatically from the moment of creation of
the work.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Tommi Komulainen <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-03 22:26]:
> > Or does @gnusupport think that merely using GNU Emacs to run Spacemacs makes Spacemacs into an Emacs distribution? **Edit:** On further reading https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLPlugins, maybe they do. It is very confusing.

Yes, it is new work based on mainstream Emacs. It depends on Emacs and
modifies Emacs in such a way to provide new work.

That is fine and I encourage it and I like it.

Please see the GPL3 where it says:

  To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an
exact copy.  The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the
earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.

Spacemacs is based on the earlier work (Emacs). It combines various
parts and various software into one whole.

Re: [syl20bnr/spacemacs] Proposal to improve GPL compliance (#14444)

[github.com]

* Sylvain Benner <notifications@github.com> [2021-03-04 06:33]:
> @gnusupport You are the expert here. I don't understand half of what you are saying and I'm not interested in understanding it. But I'm willing to improve Spacemacs compliance with GPLv3 if it is a reasonable proposal (i.e. I don't 3km long headers in each file).
> 
> You are asking about doing this:
> - [ ]  Full license text file is missing in the distribution.
> - [ ] Source files do not have proper license notices. "GPLv3" is
>    not enough. This is not even related to the section 5 but to
>    general application of GNU GPLv3 license, and Spacemacs authors
>    with to license it as GPLv3 but just need to place proper notices
>    in each source files.
> - [ ] Somewhere in the interactive interface you could add short
>    copyright notice, something like "Copying Conditions" in accordance
>    with the section 5.
> 
> Can you either:
> - open a PR with the correct missing info
> - or give concrete examples about what is needed
> 
> Thank you for your help, this is greatly appreciated.

Sorry I cannot open pull request as I do not use Github neither other
Git. I have opened this issue, and it should be clear what has to be
done, you confirmed it as well in this comment.

1. Placing COPYING file with the GPLv3 inside of the Spacemacs
   repository should be a minute of work. Plaint text format is here:
   https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt

2. Source files can be distributed independently of the whole package,
   how the copyright notice each source file should look like one can
   see for example when you do M-x find-library RET async RET with the
   difference of author's names. Same information on "How to Apply
   These Terms to Your New Programs" is written in the license text of
   the GPL-3.0 above.

3. Read section from GPL-3.0:

   "An interactive user interface displays "Appropriate Legal Notices"
    to the extent that it includes a convenient and prominently
    visible feature that (1) displays an appropriate copyright notice,
    and (2) tells the user that there is no warranty for the work
    (except to the extent that warranties are provided), that
    licensees may convey the work under this License, and how to view
    a copy of this License.  If the interface presents a list of user
    commands or options, such as a menu, a prominent item in the list
    meets this criterion."

    As when one runs plain Emacs that is complied to, but when user
    runs Spacemacs there is no appropriate prominent item in the list
    to tell about licensing.