liebre...@grossmann-venter.com writes: > Unfortunately you overlooked one little point. > > From the author > " > But perhaps there's something in the code that you can use towards > your own goals. Like, for example,the routines for drawing the > diminished and half-diminished circles. > Like parsing input. Whatever. > " > > Which gives the right to change the code at least for the diminished > argument.
Try reading what I actually wrote: >> What's relevant for this is mostly "in source of an interpreted >> language", since modifying and using code given to you for your own >> private use tends to be allowed by most copyright jurisdiction. The >> freedom of the GPL kicks in when you want to _share_ your >> modifications with others, for discussion, for integration into >> LilyPond, or for other purposes. > In US copyright law that is consent and that is exactly what Mason did What about "modifying and using code given to you for your own private use tends to be allowed by most copyright jurisdiction." did you not understand? The most annoying thing about licensing discussions (and a whole lot of other discussions) is that people simply cannot be bothered to actually read what they are replying to and just put out their standard text blocks based on trigger words, violently refuting straw men. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
