Hum. It seems to me this is greyer that what you say. gcc transforms program.c into a.out
Your access to a.out gives you rights to access program.c s/gcc/lilypond/; s/program.c/score.ly/; s/a.out/out.pdf/; I see very little difference. More importantly, what would lawyers and judges from various legislative systems think about this? Our opinion counts up to a point (which is very insignificant). I suspect it's not as clear cut as you make it. I am not a lawyer either. This message is not legal advice L On Thu, 20 Oct 2022, 13:47 Jean Abou Samra, <j...@abou-samra.fr> wrote: > > Le 20/10/2022 12:59 CEST, Luca Fascione <l.fasci...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > > > > Or you remove it, or you reimplement it > > > Well yes. > > > > I think having GPL content in the lsr is the least desirable in the long > term, because either folks using it won't notice, or they might find > themselves unable or unwilling to use GPL as part of their content. > > > Perhaps. > > > > I'm not clear what it means to have GPL source in a sheet of which you > have the pdf, it would seem to imply you'd have access to the whole > Lilypond source for it, maybe, if you asked for it. A publisher might be > unwilling to accept such terms, maybe > > > No; the GPL puts no restrictions on the output of the program, > only on the program itself and modified versions (and compiled > versions of it, but I really don't think compiling to PDF would > count, because the purpose of a PDF is to be viewed, not to be > executed like an executable produced by a C compiler). Cf. > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatCaseIsOutputGPL > > LilyPond does embed a tagline, but it's so short you'd have trouble > claiming copyright on its text. The only thing in the output PDF > that could be considered copyrighted from LilyPond is the glyphs > from the Emmentaler font, and this is covered in the LICENSE file: > > * The files under mf/ form a font, and this font is dual-licensed > under the GPL+Font exception and the SIL Open Font License (OFL). > A copy of the OFL is in the file LICENSE.OFL. > > The font exception for the GPL stipulates the following exception: > > If you create a document which uses fonts included in LilyPond, > and embed this font or unaltered portions of this font into the > document, then this font does not by itself cause the resulting > document to be covered by the GNU General Public License. This > exception does not however invalidate any other reasons why the > document might be covered by the GNU General Public License. > If you modify one or more of the fonts, you may extend this > exception to your version of the fonts but you are not obliged > to do so. If you do not wish to do so, delete this exception > statement from your version. > > > In other words, everything is done properly so that an output PDF > from LilyPond is not covered by the GPL. > > However, if you use the -dembed-source-code option to embed your > source in the PDF, then the source remains under whatever license > you distribute it, independently from the graphical content of the > PDF. If it's adapted from source code found in LilyPond, it must be > GPL. > > IANAL (I should have said this on all my previous messages) >
