Jason Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I thought the output would be a 'derivative work' of PSPP, which would > be covered by the GPL. Is that right? Maybe not.
Does the output have PSPP code in it? To be a derivative work, it would have to contain PSPP code, as I understand copyright law. I was expecting the output to mostly be a bunch of numbers, with a little bit of C wrapper code. We don't try to GPL other numbers that PSPP outputs. > The output is a program written by another program, which is > GPL'd, so is the output GPL'd? I don't think that's true in general. PSPP outputs PostScript programs as output, but that's clearly not GPL'd. Autoconf outputs shell programs, but those aren't GPL'd (they have a very permissive copyright notice). The output of Bison is sometimes GPL'd, but only when it contains part of Bison itself. -- "To the engineer, the world is a toy box full of sub-optimized and feature-poor toys." --Scott Adams _______________________________________________ pspp-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-dev
