[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Scope of Lout's license

From: David Kuehling
Subject: Re: Scope of Lout's license
Date: 28 Jun 2004 16:49:28 +0200

>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Beach <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello, I've never looked, but I'll take your word about Lout source
> postscript being in the postscript files Lout later produces from a
> user's markup.  However, when the postscript is printed, the only
> thing that shows up is the content the user put in his or her markup
> file. The Lout source postscript is used by the printer and then
> discarded, it never makes it to the printed page. A publisher only
> needs to be concerned with the copyright of the material they actually
> publish, and in this case they never publish the Lout source.

I didn't thought about the printed output vs. postscript issue.  But
you're probably right, the printed work won't under any circumstance be
covered by the GPL.  Still, if I pass my lout-generated PostScript to
somebody, eg by putting it on the internet for download, then I'm
distributing a program, which contains GPL-licensed parts.  So the
receiving party would have the right to ask me for the "source code".
Given the GPL's definition of source code, that would be my .lout

Again the disctinction between printed output vs postscript seems to
help here.  I could just print my file into bitmap-files for download.
Or, more effectively, use `gs' as a postscript->postscript filter that
generates quite low-level output.

> I don't think a publisher should be the least bit concerned about
> copyright infringment due to Lout source being in the postscript file.
> If they are, they should also be concerned about copyright
> infringement occuring every time they use any printer driver. 

Printer drivers come with their own license.  That license would most
likely be designed to allow you using the driver without infringing the
copyright.  The GPL is a very generic license, that sometimes just
doesn't seem to fit.

I hope all this doesn't sound too paranoid.  But when it comes to
legalese, paranoia sometimes seems to be appropriate ;).

GnuPG public key: http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~dvdkhlng/dk.gpg
Fingerprint: B17A DC95 D293 657B 4205  D016 7DEF 5323 C174 7D40

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]