Re: LilyPond, LilyPond snippets and the GPL

[David Kastrup]

Karsten Reincke <address@hidden> writes:

> Many thanks for your comment. It contains an important hint. BUt it is a bit 
> apart
> from my crucial point: 
>
> I am not arguing that my LilyPond work (or a snippet) is covered by
>the GPL because it is 'executed' by LilyPond. I argue that my code is
>covered by the GPL if I use (include or copy) a GPL licensed
>snippet. And if it is covered, then in accordance to the GPL §6 (title:
>"Conveying Non-Source Forms") also the compiled version is covered by
>the GPL. (BTW: even a picture is binary code which is interpreted)

You are correct that you cannot license the source under any license
other than the GPL if you are going to distribute it containing GPL
licensed snippets (the LSR snippets are PD, the Notation Reference
contents GFDL).  But the PDF reflecting your source code is a derivative
of the actual content-reflecting parts of the source code.  Of which you
are the copyright holder.

So the solution is not to distribute your source code embedding GPLed
elements.

-- 
David Kastrup