[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: persistent lisp objects
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: persistent lisp objects |
Date: |
Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:03:13 -0400 |
> The copyright on compiler output follows the copyright on the input
> that was compiled. In other words, the copyright holder of the input
> also has the copyright on the output.
So, if the output produced of the compiler originates by a method
dispatched on a
subclassed object it would be under GPL?
I do not follow you.
I am not sure what scenario you mean.
There are two questions here (and in any such case): who holds the
copyright, and whether there is any constraint on the license that the
copyright holder can release under. What I spoke about is who holds
the copyright.
What of cases where one or more methods so specialized act in concert to
snarf
data from some other source(s) where these sources are extraneous to the
local
handlers - e.g. the GPL'd objects/methods?
data -> object -> method -> compiled-output
That is very abstract. It is hard to consider these issues in the abstract.
Only a concrete scenario has all the details that affect the answer.
Re: persistent lisp objects, MON KEY, 2009/10/02