[lltx] otfload licences

[Elie Roux]

Will Robertson a écrit :
> 1.  We have code from ConTeXt which is in the GPL (v2, apparently)
>
> 2.  Any derived work from that code must also be in the GPL.
>   

Right. Note that luaotfload.dtx, mkluatexfontdb, luat-ovr anr font-nms 
are not derived files.

> 3.  Are we allowed to distribute luaotfload under CC0 with the ConTeXt files under GPL? I didn't think so:
>   

No, luaotfload was never distributed under the CC0 license... 
luaotfload.dtx (and the derived files) and the other files we created 
were, but the whole package was distrbuted under GPL.

> 4.  Do we *want* to have this weird double-licencing? If so, why?
>   

I personally really dislike GPL and LPPL for TeX code, it makes things 
too complicated, and it causes the kind of legal fog that starts by "for 
practical purpose"... With CC0, you can do anything you want and even 
change the license.

> My suggestion is to have the whole bundle under a single licence. And because the ConTeXt code is already GPL, so should all the rest.
>   

I don't really see the point... You can distruibute code under CC0 (the 
code we created) in a GPL package...

> I originally interpreted that to mean anyone else writing ConTeXt modules, but on second read it's more ambiguous than that. I'm going to take the conservative approach and ignore that paragraph from now on. ("For practical purposes" doesn't sound very legally sound, to me.)
>   

Yes, we have no choice but ignoring it...

> But we're in the reverse situation: you can't distribute GPL code under the CC0 licence.
>   

I said from the beginning that luaotfload was distributed under GPL. 
What could help is that the ConTeXt files contain the legal notice that 
you find (theorically) in all the GPL files, this would make things 
clearer... but I don't think Hans likes it (and I understand him in a 
way...).

To make it clear maybe a paragraph in the readme saying that the whole 
package is distributed under GPL would help... Anyway if you really like 
legal things, you should put a COPYING file in git containing the GPLv2 
text, it's part of the license...

So, what exactly is the point of going all-GPL? It simplifies a little 
bit, but gives some useless restrictions to some files.

Thank you,
-- 
Elie