From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:5f26::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id eFQFHyLQlWX2+gAAkFu2QA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:22:42 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id EI4+GSLQlWW7HAAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:22:42 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=koszko.org header.s=mail header.b=ttx8S7y9; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1704316962; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=ptiY+ymwomizxhnvvk2UPA5wNyaUPshcx3nsjhExbFE=; b=BKDsNYGhNyZt7UmmdxEA03Zu/YWOpfbmUALsETw8CaogqBgXDtdJ/q4J9HsHec5CWlHSPH /RMY9O4/tAXIu4rNEouNF8UVDvBT0zB6dOsL8M+dS5cGqXJJKMCQZKgoOLcCCJuCVya9lo O4QNb9bLs1phOBcjeG4lc1W85kDdVVB9+Vu/etO5gBcpKCKGsKfycks5HFp5kcQu1Dd3Dj 2iQEboT4NKZFZVC6miD4agoO+JcW5JWKLeL4NqsMFHjmW5rOUy6RQpfXEMduWlxST12AmZ D3/OOhpiMp9q50XwpOYdH4HveQwaEhD61KcH4Nl8hLhfWh0t0bYfpMJrSMP0eQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1704316962; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=qc/XClXFYNrBhbs81Cqr62ROLcF4PvnII5PFfoMcm9zjjW77HQANsNjRGiuTVelDEQAKJz JZE9JFHBrBnjWiUkLZajLxr/mK1BuhSvwx6nGX6Vn7OKB91w11TYkxu2QegUH9Dsw/MLZd yaqbLBxa/AHkOVuFmIitd/tGNjKOOJMGPmkXZp+Dj+AyZSwx3B3GF3blibYjPmyKa/4XhL 8EiLGhF4H371dt+2l5qQxDsc5e295m9z91zsOLUYIM/5WTBcnQM7PJjiVAcmZOMsvjO8hw 2YfQIirdgJbmMKY9s44n3SM6NAK+3rBdL2luo4ZZNZi6QhPj+vwX9D9ExR6/Bg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=koszko.org header.s=mail header.b=ttx8S7y9; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EC7F5CFA8 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 22:22:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8gs-0006XX-D5; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:22:18 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8gr-0006XP-Ag for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:22:17 -0500 Received: from koszko.org ([93.95.227.159]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8go-0006AD-Jf for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:22:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=koszko.org; s=mail; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject :Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ptiY+ymwomizxhnvvk2UPA5wNyaUPshcx3nsjhExbFE=; b=ttx8S7y9Dx4bSGLRE3bWU/Fuzt /l6PoC2vqfW2EYXyPRssmkaQ3PMoTxkMzxiGTcETMnhieEBSnISLJSDl5HoZde5ntUHWku8LaSe0/ ZBMBtK2s3yP177iOeP5DZ7OGRjz183WjlKq4ggAD5pmIT00RbLwK/3k7OVgmRa64C/zUaNlLBpYPP 8cobOD3bIWuEpF6wcbTN6Kb/JNIib476tulKZFD6+mUiGTCDZ3RmDKVKC2yXLcVZ9I7GuySD50aD/ ENiZXJdEmrIe0w/aKU9Xlc/nz5kzkdAe0NIZY4YhFidwnYnQP9Vs5t0lqfj04fk0ct07IcNK/MdV5 95a5zMjTihQeTmymT5TNZZZbzwemLz8nASMv87ASncpO515PmKddDoGSnahVzlAKgErE+0OOsof3v 94GNoIaBjT67vvgY1JfgbWmlBNcku/rby8MuD3ugbv8llF0sIJN6/rTzR/eGssa2/P2aijXUNSITl u8+HmxYVf0rQz9Sha6l6Y0VnaHsfXxFws9nfvybnA+eJiA73shj9/zg8srxesmJIB4zAt/4ClwLyV 3dgFcm2ZBMh5bleJfbn1uXa1OsOHuGQ/HTAJrhhjvtq+L22jvYQknYDt0sR77HOGFyPLwikv81Us3 JonqpOWarV+ToDZSPiRSygpXQvsn6EzSMyPFfKWGQ=; Received: from 78-11-235-71.static.ip.netia.com.pl ([78.11.235.71] helo=localhost) by koszko.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96.1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL8gl-0003Eg-10; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:22:11 +0100 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 22:22:09 +0100 To: Liliana Marie Prikler Cc: Felix Lechner , guix-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: Mixing GPL and non-copyleft code in source files Message-ID: <20240103222209.1dab71fe.koszko@koszko.org> In-Reply-To: <1a0a9285ff86d7498af1da630f44fe0eaa7edcd8.camel@gmail.com> References: <20231222175325.5e611342.koszko@koszko.org> <87zfy2nmm7.fsf@lease-up.com> <20231222220620.35150150.koszko@koszko.org> <87tto9oo6q.fsf@lease-up.com> <20231223191905.168b3fad.koszko@koszko.org> <20231227102247.45350dd4.koszko@koszko.org> <20240103184608.5d05b5c6.koszko@koszko.org> <1a0a9285ff86d7498af1da630f44fe0eaa7edcd8.camel@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.37; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/Y/p3pW2_yYDf4HOjfqBTul+"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=93.95.227.159; envelope-from=koszko@koszko.org; helo=koszko.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-to: Wojtek Kosior From: Wojtek Kosior via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -8.87 X-Spam-Score: -8.87 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 1EC7F5CFA8 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx11.migadu.com X-TUID: NvJ7CySyGStx --Sig_/Y/p3pW2_yYDf4HOjfqBTul+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > I don't know whether you are a consequentialist but I surely am not.=C2= =A0 > > I am trying to apply the principle of double effect in my reasoning.=C2= =A0 > > If I am to be criticized for making morally wrong choices, let the > > criticism at least concern incorrect application of that principle. =20 > Even the principle of double effect goes against what you're imagining. > The potential threat of litigation is not intended and way outweighed > by the benefits of free software. I don't see the threat as just an effect of using a non-public-domain license. One that can be disputed to be intended or not. Rather, I consider use of such license itself a threat, although a polite one, I admit. Wojtek -- (sig_start) website: https://koszko.org/koszko.html fingerprint: E972 7060 E3C5 637C 8A4F 4B42 4BC5 221C 5A79 FD1A follow me on Fediverse: https://friendica.me/profile/koszko/profile =E2=99=A5 R29kIGlzIHRoZXJlIGFuZCBsb3ZlcyBtZQ=3D=3D | =C3=B7 c2luIHNlcGFyYXR= lZCBtZSBmcm9tIEhpbQ=3D=3D =E2=9C=9D YnV0IEplc3VzIGRpZWQgdG8gc2F2ZSBtZQ=3D=3D | ? U2hhbGwgSSBiZWNvbWUg= SGlzIGZyaWVuZD8=3D -- (sig_end) On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 21:19:14 +0100 Liliana Marie Prikler wrote: > Am Mittwoch, dem 03.01.2024 um 18:46 +0100 schrieb Wojtek Kosior: > > Before getting back to the discussion, please let me ask 1 question. > > Assume I submit a patch series that adds some useful and needed code > > and includes a copyright notice with a promise, like this > >=20 > > ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2023 Wojtek Kosior > > ;;; Wojtek Kosior promises not to sue for violations of this file's > > license. > >=20 > > Will this weirdness be considered minor enough to tolerate?=C2=A0 I made > > sure the promise line takes below 78 chars. =20 > It will be considered minor enough to be removed according to section 7 > of the GPL. >=20 > > Now, my response to Liliana.=C2=A0 This is becoming a viewpoint-oriented > > discussion so if you want us to continue outside the mailing list, > > please tell. =20 > Feel free to take this off-list anytime. I will neither insist you do > nor you don't. >=20 > > > > These legal means can be considered brutal.=C2=A0 Even if I did > > > > something bad to someone (which I'm trying not to), I wouldn't > > > > like them to make efforts to have me imprisoned or fined.=C2=A0 > > > > Similarly, I wish not to have others imprisoned/fined but rather > > > > pursue justice via as peaceful means as possible. > > > >=20 > > > > Now, one could argue that I could just use a copyleft license and > > > > then not sue =E2=80=94 that's what RMS said when we met in 2021.=C2= =A0 But > > > > that's where the notion of threat comes to the foreground.=C2=A0 Ju= st > > > > as I consider license lawsuits not to be in line with my > > > > conscience, I consider lawsuit threats (even conceales ones) not > > > > to be in line either.=C2=A0 And non-public-domain licenses fall in > > > > this category, at least as long as licensing is understood in > > > > terms of legal systems.=C2=A0 =20 > > > I think you are (willingly or otherwise) drawing an incomplete > > > picture here.=C2=A0 When the FSF sues, rather than seek for damages, > > > they seek publication of software, which is exactly what the GPL > > > already tells you to do. =20 > >=20 > > I disagree about my picture being incomplete.=C2=A0 It's perhaps just > > deeper =E2=80=94 if a sued party got ordered to release the source code= but > > did not, it would get punished for not complying with the court > > order. Somewhere deeper in the background the copyright licenses are > > still backed by force.=C2=A0 I could "retain a clear conscience through= a > > lack of awareness" of this hidden threat of force=E2=80=A6 but I somehow > > became aware of it years ago and that's how I ended here :) =20 > Wishful thinking won't get you into a world where copyright law doesn't > exist. I agree that in a vacuum, threatening a "person" (note, that > corporations aren't people, but pretend to be in court=E2=80=A6 anyway) w= ith a > fine or violence if they don't give me some source code is silly.=20 > However, we live in a society where those "people" threaten the rest of > society on a daily basis for daring to share it with others. >=20 > See Alexandre's reply for a longer explanation. >=20 > > > > Whenever I publish some code under CC0, others could of course > > > > remove the CC0 license notices, put different license in place > > > > and legally redistribute that code =E2=80=94 thus making it seem as= if I > > > > were using a non-public-domain license in the first place.=C2=A0 I'm > > > > not doing anything about it because there's little I could do.=C2=A0 > > > > But if I were to somehow authorize or aid in something like this, > > > > I object.=C2=A0 Which is what we're discussing in this thread.=C2= =A0 =20 > > > This appears to be a case of wanting your cake and eating it as > > > well. By declaring some piece of software public domain you already > > > aid in its proprietary redistribution.=C2=A0 You simply retain a clear > > > conscience through a lack of awareness. =20 > >=20 > > It seems there might be some misunderstanding resulting from us > > applying different sets of ethical criteria.=C2=A0 If one is e.g. a > > consequentialist, the overall outcome is what matters.=C2=A0 And the go= od > > of having all derivative programs released as free software can be > > considered to heavily outweigh the evil of making a not-very-explicit > > legal threat. > >=20 > > I don't know whether you are a consequentialist but I surely am not.=C2= =A0 > > I am trying to apply the principle of double effect in my reasoning.=C2= =A0 > > If I am to be criticized for making morally wrong choices, let the > > criticism at least concern incorrect application of that principle. =20 > Even the principle of double effect goes against what you're imagining. > The potential threat of litigation is not intended and way outweighed > by the benefits of free software. Now you can tick off that mark and > continue with your life. >=20 > > As a side note, if I were a consequentialist, I'd probably be much > > less of a software freedom advocate. =20 > While there may be consequentialist critiques to the PDE, there are too > many consequentialist ethics to lump them all together. I'd personally > even consider the PDE partially consequentialist, as it considers the > outcomes of an action to determine morality, even if it does a very bad > job of doing so. Again, I believe your criticism to be born in > misunderstandings. >=20 > > > > RMS called my approach "pacifism" and he is probably right.=C2=A0 E= ven > > > > most Catholics like myself would disagree with me =E2=80=94 many ma= ke use > > > > copyright, after all.=C2=A0 But my own conscience is telling me not= to > > > > do > > > > certain things that seem harmful and I'm trying to obey it.=C2=A0 = =20 > > > The nice thing about holy scripture is that you can justify just > > > about anything with it, especially if you are liberal in your > > > interpretation. It gets even easier with classical reasoning: Just > > > pick two contradicting sentences (or even a self-contradicting > > > one), and it logically entails every sentence, even those that > > > large language models come up with. =20 > >=20 > > I didn't talk about Bible anywhere.=C2=A0 I only talked about conscienc= e =E2=80=94 > > which is shaped by many things, not just Bible =E2=80=94 and merely men= tioned > > Catholicism.=C2=A0 And yet, the response I get on a public mailing list > > mocks the Bible.=C2=A0 That's sad. =20 > If you're that pedantic, I didn't specifically talk about the Bible > either. Now, I know you can be Catholic without having read the book > ('t even makes it easier), but I kindly ask you not to justify your > views on copyright with it, as few of us are certified priests who can > correct you if you have been led astray in your faith. Cool? Cool. >=20 > > If you want, I'll happily take part in a discussion about Bible's > > value. We can talk about the cultural context, the symbolism, > > different levels of meaning of some texts, their history and that the > > Scripture is infallible with respect to theological, not historical > > truths =E2=80=94 contrary to what some expect. =20 > Now, I'm not here to debate theological "truths", but I can roll 3d20 > on Gods and Cults if you insist. >=20 > > > Now pardon my agnosticism, but even you yourself remark that people > > > sharing your faith have different opinions on copyright.=C2=A0 I thus > > > highly doubt that it ought to have a big influence over yours :) =20 > >=20 > > If we consider faith just a set of dogmas, I agree.=C2=A0 But if we > > consider it a relation or journey =E2=80=94 why not?=C2=A0 Not everythi= ng can be > > dogmatized =E2=80=94 there's a lot of place for personal experience and > > reflections.=C2=A0 And mine have led me to my views on copyright =C2=AF= \_(=E3=83=84)_/=C2=AF =20 > Yeah, I'll need an Orientation skill check real quick. >=20 > > > > I hope my issue is clarified, I am sorry it hasn't been so from > > > > the beginning.=C2=A0 It felt that including an explanation like the > > > > above one with the previous email would add up to an essay > > > > inappropriately long for this mailing list, I hope you agree.=C2=A0= =20 > > > I do agree on the inappropriate size, but at the same time I > > > disagree on the clarification bit, in that your issue hasn't yet > > > been distilled to its purest form.=C2=A0 There instead appear to be s= ome > > > misconceptions clouding your mind making it so that we (and perhaps > > > even you yourself) have to come up with a consistent belief about > > > copyright in the first place. =20 > >=20 > > Perhaps while we are engaging in this viewpoint-oriented discussion, > > we can at least implement some temporary solution to the initial > > issue? :) =20 > Scroll back to the top. >=20 > > > > I'll add that in the past I tried using the GPL while making it > > > > not look like a threat by adding a "promise not to sue" below the > > > > notice.=C2=A0 I have since switched to CC0 because it's less ambigi= ous > > > > (promises could have legally unexpected/untested outcomes) and > > > > easier to use.=C2=A0 I could once again use such promise approach f= or > > > > some code if it is more welcome =E2=80=94 it'd still require a > > > > "statement" to be accepted by the maintainers, tho.=C2=A0 Do you th= ink > > > > it is more "possible" this way?=C2=A0 =20 > > > I think the threat of legal dispute can much more easily be avoided > > > by [...] =20 > >=20 > > Thanks for trying to help here.=C2=A0 Sorry to say, the suggestions you > > make don't remove what I called the "threat". > > =20 > > > Promising not to sue is not even good pacifism anyway.=C2=A0 It's like > > > advocating for worker's rights without even holding a sign in the > > > streets. =20 > >=20 > > Well, there's no incentive for me to argue for a pacifist label. =20 > You should go back and think about that PDE you were mentioning > earlier. >=20 > > To make things clear =E2=80=94 promise not to sue has been found by at = least > > one court to be equivalent to a license.=C2=A0 So GPL with a promise > > should have similar legal effect to a public domain waiver, all while > > hopefully making it easier to mix with others' GPL'd code when need > > arises.=C2=A0 That's the entire point of it. =20 > Assuming I have said anything to the contrary, I will now stand > corrected. Anyhow, you are probably better served with an actual > license that has been tried in more than one court, but if you want to > ask Jesus for legal advice instead, that's fine by me. >=20 > > > > > It does defeat the purpose of the GPL if you, however, because > > > > > whoever wants to make a proprietary spin-off will simply take > > > > > the CC-0, since whereas the GPL gives you access to all the > > > > > changes when they redistribute it, the CC-0 gives you bupkis.=C2= =A0 =20 > > > >=20 > > > > I agree that copyleft can be a powerful weapon against > > > > proprietors. My issue is definitely about something else than it > > > > being ineffective=C2=A0 =20 > > > Sadly, the message cuts off here.=C2=A0 (Or perhaps you are just miss= ing > > > a sentence-ending period?) =20 > >=20 > > I'm male hence the lack of period. =20 > I would not have guessed until you pointed that out to me. >=20 > > Well, during my school years there was a meme in Poland about period > > at the end of a message being a "period of hate".=C2=A0 I simply retain= ed > > a habit of omitting the last period.=C2=A0 I guess I can as well include > > it when writing english since few will get the joke anyway=E2=80=A6 =20 > I=E2=80=A6 am not sure how this applies in the context of email, and you = anyhow > leave a "proper" greeting below, so it doesn't make sense to drop the > period in that sentence. It just makes people assume you wrote the > greeting first and then >=20 > Cheers --Sig_/Y/p3pW2_yYDf4HOjfqBTul+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYIAB0WIQTpcnBg48VjfIpPS0JLxSIcWnn9GgUCZZXQAQAKCRBLxSIcWnn9 GnahAQCrA7UbNrMUMM1cqqbdWmJ3qxHcI5n69A6jWPCHt9bNTQEA1MA0O7RqwJdv yD26RBObTpe1cxGh3RGIwGAX+MGCtAQ= =JoTw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Y/p3pW2_yYDf4HOjfqBTul+--