1
0
mirror of https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git synced 2024-11-29 07:58:28 +00:00
emacs/admin/notes/copyright
Chong Yidong e349c2087a Image issues resolved.
bar.xpm unused, deleted.
dead.xpm is a smiley, copyright info added from Gnus changelog.
gnus.xpm is a conversion of Gnus/Emacs logo.
kill-group.xpm is a conversion of close.xpm
reverse-smile.xpm unused, deleted.
rot13.xpm replaced with conversion of close.xpm
2007-02-14 17:48:45 +00:00

347 lines
14 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters

This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
See the end of the file for license conditions.
NOTES ON COPYRIGHTS AND LICENSES
Some terminology:
A "copyright notice" consists of one or a few lines of this format:
"Copyright (C) 2006, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc."
A "license notice" is a statement of permissions, and is usually much
longer, eg the text "GNU Emacs is free software...".
Every non-trivial file distributed through the Emacs CVS should be
self-explanatory in terms of copyright and license. This includes
files that are not distributed in Emacs releases (for example, the
admin/ directory), because the whole Emacs CVS is publicly
available.
The definition of triviality is a little vague, but a rule of thumb is
that any file with less than 15 lines of actual content is trivial. If
a file is auto-generated (eg ldefs-boot.el) from another one in the
CVS, then it does not really matter about adding a copyright statement
to the generated file.
However, here is a quote from Matt Norwood (Software Freedom Law
Center) that suggests we should revise the above policy about trivial
files:
If FSF has a strong policy reason notices off of files it
considers "trivial", this will take a lot more bookkeeping; it
also runs the risk of these "trivial" files later growing into
non-trivial files, and being in the tree without any record of
authorship. All in all, I think it's a better policy to attach the
notice and let future authors decide if something is trivial when
they want to reuse it elsewhere.
[...]
In general, copyright law will step back and look at the overall "work"
consisting of all the assembled components working together as a system;
it will apply protection and permissions to this system, not to its
subcomponents. If parts of it are recombined into another system, it
will consider the protections and permissions for each of the source
components only in order to assess the overall status of the work again.
The assessment of whether a set of components is entitled to copyright
protection is the degree to which they display "creativity": not as
atomic units, but as parts of a system working in concert. Thus, several
"trivial" components working together in some coherent system might be
protectible.
RMS feels, though, that in trivial files (eg etc/FTP), having a
license notice looks odd. Matt Norwood has confirmed it is not
_necessary_ to have licenses in such files, so we are sticking with
the policy of no licenses in "trivial" files.
The years in the copyright notice should be updated every year (see
file "years" in this directory). The PS versions of refcards etc
should display copyright notices (an exception to the rule about
"generated" files), but these can just display the latest year. The
full list of years should be kept in comments in the source file. If
these are distributed in CVS, check in a regenerated version when the
tex files are updated.
Copyright changes should be propagated to any associated repositories
(eg Gnus, MH-E), but I think in every case this happens automatically
(?).
All README (and other such text files) that are non-trivial should
contain copyright statements and GPL license notices, exactly as .el
files do (see e.g. README in the top-level directory). (Before 2007,
we used a simple, short statement permitting copying and modification
provided legal notices were retained. In Feb 2007 we switched to the
standard GPL text, on legal advice.)
For image files, the copyright and license details should be recorded
in a README file in each directory with images. (Legal advice says
that we need not add notices to each image file individually, if they
allow for that.). It is recommended to use the word "convert" to
describe the automatic process of changing an image from one format to
another (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00618.html).
When installing a file with an "unusual" license (after checking first
it is ok), put a copy of the copyright and license in the file (if
possible. It's ok if this makes the file incompatible with its
original format, if it can still be used by Emacs), or in a README
file in the relevant directory.
The vast majority of files are copyright FSF and distributed under the
GPL. A few files (mainly related to language and charset support) are
copyright AIST alone, or both AIST and FSF. (Contact Kenichi Handa
with questions about legal issues in such files.) In all these cases,
the copyright years in each file should be updated each year.
There are some exceptions to the points in the previous paragraph, and
these are listed below for reference, together with any files where
the copyright needs to be updated in "unusual" ways.
If you find any other such cases, please consult to check they are ok,
and note them in this file. This includes missing copyright notices,
and "odd" copyright holders. In most cases, individual authors should
not appear in copyright statements. Either the copyright has been
assigned (check copyright.list) to the FSF (in which case the original
author should be removed and the year(s) transferred to the FSF); or
else it is possible the file should not be in Emacs at all (please
report!).
Note that it seems painfully clear that one cannot rely on CVS logs,
or even ChangeLogs, for older changes. People often installed changes
from others, without recording the true authorship.
[For reference, most of these points were established via email with
rms, 2007/1, "Copyright years".]
lib-src/etags.c # print_version
lib-src/rcs2log # Copyright
lisp/calc/calc-help.el # calc-full-help
lisp/startup.el # fancy-splash-tail
mac/Emacs.app/Contents/Resources/English.lproj/InfoPlist.strings
mac/src/Emacs.r # resource 'vers'
src/emacs.c
- remember to change the latest copyright year in the --version output.
[Post-release, will automate this like set-version does for version.]
<top-level>/install-sh
lispintro/install-sh
- this file is copyright MIT, which is OK. Leave the copyright alone.
admin/check-doc-strings
public domain, leave alone.
etc/edt-user.doc
- update BOTH notices in this file
etc/letter.pbm,letter.xpm
- trivial, no notice needed.
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00324.html>
etc/GNU, INTERVIEW, LINUX-GNU, MOTIVATION, SERVICE, THE-GNU-PROJECT,
WHY-FREE
rms: "These are statements of opinion or testimony. Their licenses
should permit verbatim copying only. Please don't change the
licenses that they have. They are distributed with Emacs but they
are not part of Emacs."
etc/MAILINGLISTS
rms: simple license is fine for this file
leim/CXTERM-DIC/4Corner.tit, ARRAY30.tit, CCDOSPY.tit, ECDICT.tit,
ETZY.tit, PY-b5.tit, Punct-b5.tit, Punct.tit, QJ-b5.tit, QJ.tit,
SW.tit, TONEPY.tit, ZOZY.tit
- leave the copyrights alone.
leim/MISC-DIC/CTLau-b5.html, CTLau.html, cangjie-table.b5, cangjie-table.cns,
pinyin.map, ziranma.cin
- leave the copyright alone.
leim/SKK-DIC/SKK-JISYO.L
ja-dic/ja-dic.el
(the latter is auto-generated from the former). Leave the copyright alone.
lib-src/etags.c
- this has a copyright Ken Arnold. We are still deciding what should
be done here (see below).
lib-src/getopt1.c, getopt_int.h
- these are from the GNU C library. Leave the copyrights alone.
lisp/play/tetris.el
- no special rules about the copyright. We note here that we believe
(2007/1) there is no problem with our use of the name "tetris" or
the concept.
rms: "My understanding is that game rules as such are not copyrightable."
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-01/msg00960.html>
lispref/doclicense.texi
man/doclicense.texi
- leave the copyright alone in this imported file.
lisp/net/tramp.el
- there are also copyrights in the body of the file. Update these too.
msdos/is_exec.c, sigaction.c
- these files are copyright DJ Delorie. Leave the copyrights alone.
Leave the Eli Zaretskii copyright in is_exec.c alone. See the
msdos/README file for the legal history of these files.
src/gmalloc.c
- contains numerous copyrights from the GNU C library. Leave them alone.
src/acldef.h, chpdef.h, ndir.h
- see comments below. These files are OK to be released with Emacs
22, but we may want to revisit them afterwards.
[src/unexhp9k800.c - removed 2007/1/27]
[src/m/sr2k.h - removed 2007/1/27]
- First file removed due to legal uncertainties; second file removed
due to dependency on first. Note that src/m/hp800.h is still needed on
hp800 arch.
NB we would like to re-add this file if we can. Please let us know
if you can clarify its legal status.
*** These are copyright issues that need not be fixed until after
Emacs 22 is released (though if they can be fixed before, that is
obviously good):
Is it OK to just `cvs remove' a file for legal reasons, or is
something more drastic needed? A removed file is still available from
CVS, if suitable options are applied. (This CVS issue obviously does
not affect a release).
rms: will ask lawyer
Make sure that all files with non-standard copyrights or licenses are
noted in this file.
REMOVED etc/orgcard.tex, orgcard.ps
Re-add these files if an assignment is received from Rooke.
etc/images
Image files from GTK, Gnome are under GPLv2 (no "or later"?). RMS will
contact image authors in regards to future switch to v3.
src/acldef.h, chpdef.h, ndir.h
On legal advice from Matt Norwood, the following comment was added
to these files in Feb 2007:
The code here is forced by the interface, and is not subject to
copyright, constituting the only possible expression of the
algorithm in this format.
With the addition of this notice, these files are OK for the
upcoming Emacs-22 release. Post-release, we can revisit this issue
and possibly add a list of all authors who have changed these files.
(details in email from Matt Norwood to rms, 2007/02/03).
REMOVED src/unexhp9k800.c
- we would like to re-add this file if possible. Please let us know
if you can clarify its legal status.
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00138.html
etc/BABYL
RMS: "The lawyer said we can keep BABYL."
*** These are copyright issues still to be addressed:
Maybe some relevant comments here?
<http://groups.google.com/group/linux.debian.legal/browse_thread/thread/123547ea95437a1f>
All README (and other such files) that are non-trivial and were added
by Emacs developers need copyright statements and copying permissions.
lisp/term/README?
borderline "trivial" cases (see below)...?
These should use the standard GPL text (same as .el files), rather
than the short notices we have been using till now.
rms: "If a README file is under 60 lines long, using the long version
might be ugly. Please tell me if you encounter one that is under 60
lines."
etc/gnus-logo.eps, gnus-booklet.ps, gnus-refcard.ps
just to be safe, papers are on the way for the "Gnus logo", even
though it is very similar to the already-assigned "Emacs logo".
etc/emacs.csh (+ maybe etc/DISTRIB?)
does rms want the older, simple license for this put back? If so,
what about emacs.bash?
etc/ms-kermit - no copyright, but ms-7bkermit has one
etc/e/eterm-color.ti - no copyright
rms: "I think that is not copyrightable under the merger doctrine
because the entries are all forced. At least that is the case in the
US; I am not sure whether we can rely on that in general."
For the above files, mail sent from rms to Matthew Norwood
asking what to do (via Eben Moglen), 2007/1/22 ("Copyright years").
etc/TUTORIAL*
switch to GPL, or keep older license?
lib-src/etags.c - no 'k.* arnold' in copyright.list'
rms: "That is ok, in principle. I used free code released by Ken
Arnold as the starting point. However, it may be that we need to get
and insert whatever his license was for his code."
- 1984 version of ctags, with no copyright, posted to net.sources:
http://groups.google.com/group/net.sources/msg/a21b6c21be12a98d
lwlib/lwlib-int.h, lwlib.h - no copyright
lwlib/Makefile.in, lwlib-utils.c, lwlib.c - copyright Lucid
lwlib/lwlib-Xaw.c - copyright Chuck Thompson
lwlib/lwlib.c - copyright Lucid, but FSF copyright was added in 2002 -
was that correct?
rms: "I asked Matthew Norwood about these, I believe."
oldXMenu/
- should there be any FSF copyrights at all in here? Some were added
in 2005, without licence notices. Was this right?
oldXMenu/Makefile.in, Makefile, Imakefile, descrip.mms, insque.c
- issues described in mail to rms, 2006/12/17.
rms: "I have asked for lawyer's advice about these."
src/gnu.h
src/m/mips4.h, news-r6.h, news-risc.h, pmax.h
src/s/aix3-2.h, bsd386.h, hpux8.h, hpux9.h, irix4-0.h, irix5-0.h,
isc2-2.h, netbsd.h, osf1.h, sol2-3.h, sunos4-0.h, usg5-4-2.h
- all these (not obviously trivial) files are missing copyrights.
rms: "I should talk about these with Matthew Norwood."
The current legal advice seems to be that we should attach FSF
copyright and GPL for the time being, then review post-release. But it
is still under discussion.
This file is part of GNU Emacs.
GNU Emacs is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option)
any later version.
GNU Emacs is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with GNU Emacs; see the file COPYING. If not, write to the
Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor,
Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA.