[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GNU sharutils generated archive license
From: |
Bob Proulx |
Subject: |
Re: GNU sharutils generated archive license |
Date: |
Sat, 1 Jul 2017 14:58:56 -0600 |
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) |
Hello Daniel,
Daniel Pope wrote:
> A query has arisen in our organisation as to whether the archives created by
> the GPLv3-licensed 'shar' command must also fall under the GPLv3.
>
> I assumed there is no intention for this to be the case.
I don't think there in any intention for this either. I am not the
maintainer of sharutils but not seeing a response from anyone else I
am jumping in. I think this mail may have slipped by the maintainer
during this busy time of year. I have added a direct CC on this message.
> However, looking at the GPL FAQ[1],
>
> > [Output is copyrightable only] if substantial parts of the output are copied
> > (more or less) from text in your program. For instance, part of the output
> > of Bison (see above) would be covered by the GNU GPL, if we had not made an
> > exception in this specific case.
>
> Due to the nature of shar, I believe it does copy parts of its program text
> into the archives - in particular the shell code that "extracts" the archive.
>
> I can find no mention of a Bison-like disclaimer in the sharutils license. Is
> this an oversight?
I am thinking this may be the first time this issue has been raised
with regards to shar before. I think it is a valid concern. At the
moment I will simply make some additional noise here about it and see
if that gets noticed. :-)
Bob
Daniel Pope wrote:
> A query has arisen in our organisation as to whether the archives created by
> the GPLv3-licensed 'shar' command must also fall under the GPLv3.
>
> I assumed there is no intention for this to be the case.
>
> However, looking at the GPL FAQ[1],
>
> > [Output is copyrightable only] if substantial parts of the output are copied
> > (more or less) from text in your program. For instance, part of the output
> > of Bison (see above) would be covered by the GNU GPL, if we had not made an
> > exception in this specific case.
>
> Due to the nature of shar, I believe it does copy parts of its program text
> into the archives - in particular the shell code that "extracts" the archive.
>
> I can find no mention of a Bison-like disclaimer in the sharutils license. Is
> this an oversight?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Daniel
>
> [1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOutput
- Re: GNU sharutils generated archive license,
Bob Proulx <=