On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 14:03:30 -0700, Christopher Barker wrote: > to, so maybe I'm missing something. In essence, I see a distinction > between contributing to a project someone else is releasing, and > creating a derived work that I release myself. Maybe there is no > difference.
I'll reply only to the problematic case. (And we're definitely off-topic for the matplotlib-devel list, so I suggest we take any further discussion privately unless someone steps up and says "please, continue here"). > 2) I have written a substantial application that makes some use of some > GPL'd code. I want to put that app up on a government-run web site, and > let people use it at their will. As I understand it, I am now > "releasing" the application, and as it includes some GPL code, it MUST > be released under the GPL. But I can't do that, because I don't hold > copyright over the stuff I've written on the taxpayers time. So what do > I do? From what authority do you derive the "I can't do that" part? Think about that. You say "because I don't hold copyright", but what does that mean? Copyright would give you the ability to impose limits on the recipients, (specifically with respect to activities such as copying, creating derived works, public performance, etc.). You don't have any right to impose such limits, but you also don't need any rights. I would suggest that all of the parts that you have written by annotated with appropriate statements indicating their public-domain status. The question is, can you combine these public-domain files with other files that you obtained via the GPL? That's a question of creating a derived work which is something that requires the copyright holder's permission. And the copyright holder has given you that permission as long as the derived work is made available under the terms of the GPL. So, yes, you have permission to release the combined work under the terms of the GPL. Recipients can then modify and redistribute the combined work under the terms of the GPL. Recipients can _also_ extract any public-domain portions of the work and use those in any way whatsoever, since they are public-domain. > I could post all the code I wrote myself (released into the public > domain), then post instructions how to combine it with the GPL code, > compile it, and viola, you have your app, but that's not exactly making > things as accessible as I'd like. Does such a person have an ability that you do not? Your only unique position is that you cannot assert any copyright in the things you created. Nor can your hypothetical third party doing the combining, right? So I see no problem with you being the party doing the combining. > """ > Can the US Government release a program under the GNU GPL? > > If the program is written by US federal government employees in the > course of their employment, it is in the public domain, which means it > is not copyrighted. Since the GNU GPL is based on copyright, such a > program cannot be released under the GNU GPL. > """ That wasn't what you asked though. You asked if you could combine original software written by the government with software available under the GPL and release the combination. And that's exactly what the FSF answers in the next question: > Sure, contributing is no problem, it's the releasing of derived works > that has me concerned. But what's the distinction there? Releasing a derived work is certainly an action that requires the copyright holder's permission, but you have that permission explicitly in the GPL. There's never any relicensing. The parts that are public-domain are still public-domain. The parts that are available only under the terms of the GPL are still available only under the terms of the GPL. You cannot relicense at all unless you are the copyright holder. The only question is in the case of a combined work whether there is a set of permissions that doesn't violate the terms of any of the pieces. (This is the general "license compatibility" question.) And in the case of GPL+public domain, the answer is yes, and the set of permissions is the GPL. I think one possible point of confusion is the wording of "improvements" in the FSF GPL FAQ explaining that the government can "release improvements to a GPL-covered program". This might be interpreted as somehow implying that its only legitimate if the improvements are somehow less significant than the GPL program. A more clear answer might just say that the government, (or anyone else for that matter), can legitimately combine GPL software with public domain software and release the result under the GPL. But you certainly don't need the FSF FAQ to give you that permission explicitly. The GPL itself gives you all the permission you need. So again, I'll go back to my original question, by what authority do you see any problem? Would you be violating anybody's copyright by releasing a program combining GPL components and government-written public-domain components? That is, would you be taking any action that required a copyright holder or copyright holder's permission that you don't have? I certainly can't see any. -Carl
pgpWf3HJj48op.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________ Matplotlib-devel mailing list Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
