Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 02:30:42PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote: > > > If any non-trivial code makes a call to an Emacs function, even > > say 'buffer-substring', then do we consider that loaded code a > > GPL'ed library? I guess that's the question. > > Hmm. I was under the impression that xemacs had a different license. > However, the current xemacs is GPL'd. > > If there are no non-GPLed implementations of the interfaces used by the > code, then, yeah, that's an issue.
That's what I thought. > However, even if there are no non-GPLed implementations of the interfaces, > a trivial call to buffer-substring would not be worth worrying about. > If the code in question falls under fair use, copyright isn't an issue: > you need something substantial enough to be considered a copyrightable > work before copyright becomes an issue. This is why I picked something like buffer-substring. It has more than a handful of source code in C (50 lines or so, counting calls to other routines), which makes it copyrightable. If not, where's the line? A (require 'foobar) statement that loads some Emacs GPL'ed code? Something to think about (But I don't have a clear answer). Peter
