|
From: | Alexander Kobel |
Subject: | Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL |
Date: | Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:14:54 -0400 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120419 Icedove/11.0 |
On 03/29/2013 06:26 AM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
An example came to my mind: imagine someone typesetting a score and using one (just one) function from OLLib. Distributing whole OLLib together with the score just to have this one functionality would be inconvenient, so he'd like to actually paste this function from OLLib into his file. Can he do this? I think that such usage should be permitted (and not resulting in the final score being copylefted), as long as the function is clearly marked and attributed.
That might be a dark gray area.I'm not sure what's the smallest "unit" a license like the GPL can be applied to, but rest assured that I know from past experience that it is /very/ beneficial to have one license per file. From the law you may be right (with the same reasoning why a publisher can print the works of different composers, or both PD and copyrighted works, in the same volume), but if that case appears in reality, I strongly suggest you distribute in small pieces. One more file is cheap, one more letter from a lawyer isn't.
Best, Alexander
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |