Re: Overview of copyright issues

[Joseph Wakeling]

Matthias Kilian wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 06:04:17PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
>> So, having read the past discussion and looked through source code etc.
>> it seems like there are several general observations, some conclusions,
>> and some questions.
>>
>> Observations:
>>
>>    (1) Lilypond isn't violating any copyright/license requirements.
> 
> So what's the point of this discussion?

Part is that there's some general consensus that it would be nice to
move Lilypond to GPLv3, or at least to have the chance to do so.  Hence
some of the practical points on how to make that easier.

The other part is that there are some aspects of the way Lilypond code
and docs are managed with respect to licensing that are confusing or
problematic -- lack of licensing notices in source code, lack of
copyright or licensing notices in docs.  Those really should be fixed
and better practices established for maintaining them.  I would see that
as pretty urgent actually, far more important than the 'what license?'
question, because it relates to LP's ability to track who wrote what and
which conditions they made it available under.