From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic loading Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:09:07 +0900 Message-ID: <874p59ckcs.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <873al79akr.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> <48A5BAD7.8030302@emf.net> <48A740CB.4050404@emf.net> <20080816213508.GA8530@muc.de> <87hc9ka8eg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20080817073124.GA1294@muc.de> <87ljyv5gy5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20080818101802.GA2615@muc.de> <87bpzqqk7b.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87tzdihsrq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1219669854 30495 80.91.229.12 (25 Aug 2008 13:10:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:10:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 25 15:11:47 2008 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 1KXbpr-0004fz-6X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:10:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55119 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KXbot-0001Fx-82 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:09:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXboo-0001Fi-Tp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:09:14 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXbol-0001FA-AE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:09:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43888 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KXbol-0001F7-3y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:09:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:52864) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KXbok-0001Qn-8e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:09:10 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371551535AE; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:08:33 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0585A1A25C3; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:09:08 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM ?bug? under XEmacs 21.5.21 (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: 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:102935 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > > module. APIs apparently don't count because they're not "expressive", > > there's only one way to do it.) > > IIUC the case for GMP was based on the fact that a user of the GMP API > wasn't just using the API but was necessarily using GMP (even if loaded > dynamically) because there was no other implementation (which forced > the offending company to write a substitute for GMP which implemented > the same API but with a more liberal license). Sure, but if no GMP code is actually copied *by the distributor* then it's very hard to argue that the distributor has violated the GPL (this is something Richard referred to earlier). That was the contention of Aladdin in the Ghostscript + GNU readline case, but it didn't go to court because it didn't matter to Aladdin's business plan, it only hurt non-paying users. So they weren't willing to spend USD 0.01, and the FSF won by having more lawyers, not on the strength of the case. Did a case for GMP actually go to court, or was it simply that it seemed cheaper (in community reputation as well as legal fees) to cave in and write a workalike? That also happened with readline, of course. The BSD community has a similar library under BSD license (called libedit, I believe). > So similarly, an Elisp package can currently only be run by linking it > with GPL'd code (given the lack of non-GPL'd Emacs), which (I thought) > is the reason why it has to be GPL'd as well. Well, there's also stuff like macros to worry about. However, I think the distributor of the Lisp package could probably argue that an Elisp package is data being processed, not part of Emacs. Since running Emacs is 100% unrestricted, IMO IANAL a claim that an Elisp package must be distributed under GPL would be hard to prove under copyright law. For example, note that the special exemption to the GPL for bison only applied to programs using the "hairy" skeleton, because that was the code being copied. Even though yacc was available, copying the skeleton meant it was a derivative work. (Not directly relevant, since with elisp we have no copying -- assuming that no compiled code based on GPLed macros is distributed, but it illustrates the way to think about these problems.)