From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_R=F6hler?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: E-LISP licensing question Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:32:01 +0200 Message-ID: <51DD1C01.90402@online.de> References: <47F3A7C6.5000408@cmedresearch.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1373445069 7865 80.91.229.3 (10 Jul 2013 08:31:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:31:09 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 10 10:31:10 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Uwpnp-0001LT-An for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:31:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50338 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uwpno-0000Ae-Rb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 04:31:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36794) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uwpni-00009R-1w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 04:31:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uwpnd-0005bL-82 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 04:31:01 -0400 Original-Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:57162) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uwpnc-0005a1-QS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 04:30:57 -0400 Original-Received: from purzel.sitgens (brln-4db9c62d.pool.mediaWays.net [77.185.198.45]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap2) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lxd6Z-1U8iwA3SRP-016uxT; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:30:54 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:BIlLBLy29L2KTM14XfaRtcCSgdNPUX1ssn9Qn7Ww+BH UsrqcG1vlyEzKEHGdwZDn3OZIVbQvezgGfG6GgGXaJKiYxfq7I DV4k2tYvU4ColDdb3NtJwqJipQSY+KBTRQ65xUpXKCeaOghYFW 80w6eSoBZB4L5PQxJ2MzPDmilVpaDLhXRQcGSMoT3IsIzZYNzA GEKs53X+wUH9BRJVuYF4GIoq20G9g/mDJDy2n5vW1Tmpu/f5EH EDNEKRL6cJd0O4SzpgvFV/0qxsIpZ/buCuRwQr9RZM+nq2S8H8 vQD96W9gljdTrcJQ1/CinUPfRwcaDOs8Zbh1wYrkKLl7x4S7ta TCPD6dw9YSwZGGm9VjRI= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:161797 Archived-At: Am 09.07.2013 19:06, schrieb Glenn Morris: > Richard Stallman wrote: > >> Worse yet: what if some of those libraries are GPLv2 and the >> others are GPLv3? >> >> If a library is GPLv2-or-later that includes GPLv3. >> If a library is under GPLv2 only, we should regard it as dead >> and write a replacement. > > This isn't the real issue, and seems likely to just side-track us. > > 5 years ago, you said: > > I asked people (including a lawyer) to work on some advice about this. > Meanwhile, I suggest that people refrain from arguing about it here > without the benefit of lawyers. > > Did you ever get an answer? > The question was: > > If I write some emacs lisp code does the way emacs deals with that code > at runtime mean that the code must always be under the GPL? > > Or to put it another way... > > Does doing (require 'foo.el) link the code into emacs in such a way that > foo.el must be licensed under the GPL. > > Probably the answer is that simple, that it wasn't noticed when it came in. Legal texts may only provide some assistance to clarify the cases, never meet all. So legal resp. contractual stipulations need interpretation in the light of the purpose. Which is given with the four freedoms likewise. Which already solves how to deal with possible contradictions here. Best regards, Andreas