Re: [ jEdit-devel ] files lacking copyright notice

[Dale A. <da...@gr...>]

The original question was about files in ProjectViewer, which is a
plugin and currently maintained by Marcelo. The license for
ProjectViewer does not have to be the same as the license jEdit uses.
In general, the author of a plugin can choose the license he prefers.
For example, I've set the license on several of the plugins that I've
written to be a BSD-style license, and for at least one plugin, I've
declared it to be public domain. For jEdit code, I believe the intent
is for it to all be GPL 2.0. I don't believe it was ever decided that
it should be changed to GPL 3.0.

Dale



On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Jarek Czekalski
<jar...@po...> wrote:
> Vampire
>
> So you presented your interpretation of some GPL appendix statements.
> But what are your credentials and what is your court experience in
> international copyright law? If you have none, than it would be safer to
> follow the advices which are given by GPL authors in the appendix. I
> believe they are competent in what they do.
>
> Jarek
>
> W dniu 11/20/2011 07:01 PM, Vampire pisze:
>>
>>
>> Jarek Czekalski schrieb:
>>> W dniu 11/20/2011 03:42 AM, Vampire pisze:
>>>
>>>> Jarek Czekalski schrieb:
>>>>
>>>>> I notice a file PVActions.java (from ProjectViewer) lacks copyright
>>>>> notice. ... GPL licence requires such a
>>>>> notice. ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> GPL does not require such a notice.
>>>>
>>> A quotation from section "How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs"
>>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html#howto
>>>
>>> and each file *should* have at least the “copyright” line and a pointer
>>> to where the full notice is found.
>>>
>>> The section describes how to prepare GNU GPL software. While "terms and
>>> conditions" are important for a receiver of gpl software, these
>>> guidelines are important for those who produce such software. So I was
>>> right saying it *is required*. I don't know exactly why did you say that
>>> the notice is not required, while the rest of your post explains that
>>> you consider it an important requirement. I'm writing this because
>>> someone may misunderstand your first sentence.
>>>
>> Because it IS not required. "Should" means you should add it, but not
>> you "have to" a.k.a. "must" add it, but it is a good idea to do it.
>> Even if the GPL would require the notice to be there you wouldn't have
>> to do it as you could say the code is under GPL except for that
>> clause, because you are free to put your code under any license terms
>> you want and thus can also grant a license that is only similar to GPL
>> but has own terms, additions or leftouts.
>>>> Nowhere in GPL this is stated and you would be completely fine to just
>>>> add a license notice mentioning GPL in an extra file.
>>>> The GPL page though suggests that you add such a header to the file to
>>>> clearly state the exclusion of warranty and license of the code, but
>>>> that is just an additional suggestion below the real license terms.
>>>>
>>> It's not only on GPL page, but also in jedit file doc/COPYING.txt.
>>> That's another proof that these statements are more than just a
>>> "suggestion".
>>>
>> It is not, what is in COPYING.txt is the same that is on the webpage.
>> It is just a suggestion. I'll quote now the relevant part we are
>> talking about and add some mental additions to it in square brackets:
>>
>> To do so, attach the following notices to the program.  It is safest
>> to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
>> convey the exclusion of warranty;
>> [but you can also just put it in one file beneath your source code,
>> that would also count as "attach it to your program"]
>> and each file should have at least the "copyright" line and a pointer
>> to where the full notice is found
>> [to make it clear for someone having only that file what license it is
>> under, who the copyright owner is and that there is an exclusion of
>> warranty, but you don't have to do, it is just a good idea to do so]
>>
>> Regards
>> Vampire
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
> --
> -----------------------------------------------
> jEdit Developers' List
> jEd...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jedit-devel
>