[tex-live] license question

[David Kastrup]

Stephan Hennig <mailing_list at arcor.de> writes:

> Karl Berry schrieb:
>>     (ii) the underlying list of hyphenated words and scripts to
>>          generate patterns under a copyleft flavoured license.
>> 
>> I very strongly suggest using the GPL(v2 or later).
>> There is no problem with using the GPL for anything for which "source"
>> can be identified -- clearly not an issue here.
>
> Actually, our list of hyphenated words is partly based on another larger
> list of unhyphenated German words (plus lots of garbage) sorted by word
> frequency.   That list is /non-free/.  We have explicit permission to
> derive substantially different work and do anything we want with that.

[...]

> So I think we're on the save side.  But in fact, there is source for
> our work that cannot be distributed.  What does that mean for GPL?
> I'd think it doesn't matter as long as we're acting in compliance with
> our permissions.

It doesn't matter to you.  You have all the relevant permissions.

> For users of our work it's the same situation as if there were no
> sources.  Anything wrong with that?

Yes.  Since the GPL mandates distributing the sources (the "preferred
form of the work for making modifications to it"), nobody can meet the
conditions.  As a result, the patterns are not redistributable legally.

So you definitely need to pick a different license here.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum