From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcin Borkowski Subject: Re: Org-mode exporters licensing Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:44:00 +0200 Message-ID: <87bnexv6lb.fsf@mbork.pl> References: <87io962fdz.fsf@mbork.pl> <87a8uigff8.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <87a8ui2cxl.fsf@mbork.pl> <87twsqeyku.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <87r3ntvmuq.fsf@mbork.pl> <55B62153.4070904@grinta.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51884) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJmRd-00063b-JT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:44:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJmRZ-0005tw-4T for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:44:09 -0400 Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([2a01:5e00:2:52::8]:50708) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJmRY-0005th-T8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:44:05 -0400 In-reply-to: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Daniele Nicolodi , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On 2015-07-27, at 14:42, Greg Troxel wrote: > Daniele Nicolodi writes: > >> On 27/07/15 13:52, Marcin Borkowski wrote: >>> I disagree. Licensing a tutorial with GPL is a stupid thing to do. >>> A tutorial may contain code which people naturally mimic (or even >>> copy). Such things should definitely be in PD. > > [many excellent comments. As a nit, to reuse another's work under the > GPL under a BSD license, you need more than them not to object; you > need their affirmative permission. And if much of org is assigned to > the FSF, as I believe it is, that means the FSF's permission. That's a > use of resources about something that doesn't really matter much.] > > Indeed. A major point of which Marcin seems unaware is that licensing > in a project in is more than a legal matter. The license terms are a > declaration of intent for how the code will be shared, and people > contirbute under an expectation that those norms will be followed. I'm not "unaware", I just don't believe it. > In particular, the GPL is designed to allow sharing only when the > recipients receive rights to further share (and more). In other words, > not only is the code Free Software, but any derived works (that are > distributed) will also be Free Software. With a BSD-style license, or > PD, derived works may or may not be Free. That I do understand, my problem is "what is derived work". > Regardless of licensing, you can't make a derived work from copyrighted > code and have it be PD. And as Daniele points out, new works being PD > only works in some jurisdictions (hence CC0). Yes. Thanks -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Adam Mickiewicz University