Re: License of code posted to this list

[David Bellows]

> I'm not sure so this maybe wrong. But AFAIK copyright for content posted to 
> the list is by default with the author and has no license by itself. So I 
> think you can't assume it's PD.

This sounds correct as well. Does just making the code available to
the world in a public manner imply anything about it being OK to use
it in another project? I don't know the answer to that and thus these
questions. But you are correct, I'm betting, that the author does
automatically own the copyright to the code (at least in the US).

Should there be some kind of agreement that everyone signs off on when
subscribing to the mail list concerning any code they might
contribute?

And is the line that David added sufficient?:

> I'm more than happy to let you use the "auto-ottava" code for your
> project.  By posting it on this forum I make it available to anybody
> who sees utility in it.

Dave

On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
> Am 9. Mai 2015 22:55:32 MESZ, schrieb David Bellows <address@hidden>:
>>> Sorry about not contacting you sooner!
>>
>>It's perfectly OK! I'm sure I'm just way over-thinking the issue!
>>
>>> I'm more than happy to let you use the "auto-ottava" code for your
>>project.  By posting it on this forum I make it available to anybody
>>who sees utility in it.
>>
>>I think that probably works. I can just add that to the top of the
>>file.
>
> I'm not sure so this maybe wrong. But AFAIK copyright for content posted to 
> the list is by default with the author and has
>
> Ursno license by itself. So I think you can't assume it's PD.
>
>>
>>> My concern (and consequent hesitation in answering) is simply that,
>>should I or someone else decide incorporate it in the LilyPond code
>>base in the future, there would be no complication.
>>
>>Lilypond uses the GPL and can make use of code licensed to the public
>>domain (anyone can use public domain code with any license for any
>>purpose). https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLUSGovAdd I
>>think applies.
>>
>>> You mention that your software is Affero GPL.  Would this conflict in
>>any way with LilyPond's license?
>>
>>Nope. In fact version 3 of the GPL (the version that Lilypond uses)
>>specifically mentions that it can be used with stuff licensed with the
>>Affero GPL. The "Affero" clause was intended to close a potential
>>loophole concerning web applications and otherwise uses the exact same
>>wording as the GPL and is maintained by the FSF
>>(http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html).
>>
>>On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 1:37 PM, David Nalesnik
>><address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Hi David.
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 3:17 PM, David Bellows <address@hidden>
>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> I have a big coding project that generates Lilypond files to be
>>>> processed by Lilypond in an external process. My software is GPL. I
>>>> make use of a couple of scripts that were produced on this list but
>>>> have not been uploaded to the LSR. They are significant enough that
>>I
>>>> would consider them of concern when thinking about licensing issues.
>>>>
>>>> I've contacted the authors in each of these cases asking them to add
>>>> license information to these scripts but so far I haven't heard back
>>>> from them.
>>>>
>>>> OK, that's how these things go, but since things like this can come
>>up
>>>> again I was wondering if anyone has a knowledgeable opinion on the
>>>> state of code posted to a mail list like this? Is it automatically
>>>> public domain and so I don't need any additional licensing from the
>>>> original authors?
>>>>
>>>> Does it make a difference if the scripts were derived from code from
>>the
>>>> LSR?
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry about not contacting you sooner!
>>>
>>> I'm more than happy to let you use the "auto-ottava" code for your
>>project.
>>> By posting it on this forum I make it available to anybody who sees
>>utility
>>> in it.
>>>
>>> My concern (and consequent hesitation in answering) is simply that,
>>should I
>>> or someone else decide incorporate it in the LilyPond code base in
>>the
>>> future, there would be no complication.
>>>
>>> You mention that your software is Affero GPL.  Would this conflict in
>>any
>>> way with LilyPond's license?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>lilypond-user mailing list
>>address@hidden
>>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>