Re: Require "this program is free software .... " notice to be preserved on the splash screen

[Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>]

With copy to help-gnu-emacs:

* Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> [2021-02-13 15:05]:
> On 11.02.2021 08:04, James Lu wrote:
> > "You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you
> > receive it, in any medium, **provided that you conspicuously and
> > appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice**;
> > keep intact all notices stating that this License and any non-permissive
> > term"
> 
> Spacemacs and similar "distributions" actually don't redistribute Emacs
> itself. They're just collections of extensions together with instructions
> for installing them.
> 
> So I don't think this condition can apply, legally speaking.

Unrelated to the subject, software may be distributed in parts from
different places and be considered part of the whole.

Reference:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AggregateContainers

,----
| When it comes to determining whether two pieces of software form a
| single work, does the fact that the code is in one or more containers
| have any effect? (#AggregateContainers)
| 
|     No, the analysis of whether they are a single work or an aggregate
|     is unchanged by the involvement of containers.
`----

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation

,----
| What is the difference between an “aggregate” and other kinds of “modified versions”? (#MereAggregation)
| 
|     An “aggregate” consists of a number of separate programs,
|     distributed together on the same CD-ROM or other media. The GPL
|     permits you to create and distribute an aggregate, even when the
|     licenses of the other software are nonfree or
|     GPL-incompatible. The only condition is that you cannot release
|     the aggregate under a license that prohibits users from exercising
|     rights that each program's individual license would grant them.
| 
|     Where's the line between two separate programs, and one program
|     with two parts? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges
|     will decide. We believe that a proper criterion depends both on
|     the mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls
|     within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the
|     communication (what kinds of information are interchanged).
| 
|     If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are
|     definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run
|     linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely
|     means combining them into one program.
| 
|     By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are
|     communication mechanisms normally used between two separate
|     programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules
|     normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the
|     communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal
|     data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two
|     parts as combined into a larger program.
`----

Spacemacs promotes itself as distribution of Emacs, users download the
essential configurations and functions of Spacesmacs depend on main
Emacs which in the end turns as new version of the software, which is
also perceived that way, both depend on each other.

Thus Spacemacs shall by all means comply to the GPL.

Major question is, was that reported as bug to Spacemacs?

Jean