>> Look here: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GNU_General_Public_License§ion=11#Libraries >> >> Most useful quote: >> >>> The Free Software Foundation (which holds the copyright of several >>> notable GPL-licensed software products and of the license text itself) >>> asserts that an executable which uses a dynamically linked library is >>> indeed a derivative work. This does not however apply to separate >>> programs communicating with one another. > > Oleh, > > thanks for this link and excerpt. I could argue that the key word in > the excerpt is "executable". I cannot see how code written in elisp > itself would need to be GPL.
Exactly. To quote again https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL: When the interpreter just interprets a language, the answer is no. The interpreted program, to the interpreter, is just data; a free software license like the GPL, based on copyright law, cannot limit what data you use the interpreter on. You can run it on any data (interpreted program), any way you like, and there are no requirements about licensing that data to anyone. -- Andreas Hilboll
