[texhax] shear transform
Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd)
P.Taylor at Rhul.Ac.Uk
Thu May 19 00:02:56 CEST 2011
Karl Berry wrote:
> No, that's not the point. Their statement can and does only apply to
> the code which Jonathan/SIL wrote. They aren't and can't claim that
> kpathsea (for instance) can be distributed under their license (it
> can't), even though kpathsea is linked into xetex. One doesn't need to
> be a lawyer to understand.
I think one does. I would have made exactly the same assumption
as Peter. If a program comes with a licence, and the program is
intimately bound to ("is linked into") some other piece of software
that doesn't come separately, then I would assume (as, I think,
would the man on the top deck of the number 53 Clapham
Common Omnibus) that the licence applies to the program and
to all the adjuncts from which it cannot be separated.
If this is not the case, then is the licence correct ? Should it not
say explicitly "These parts are under my licence; these other parts,
which are included, are not, and you will need to read their
licences to know what you can and cannot do with them" ?
More information about the texhax