[pLog-svn] [gnu.org #343991] Re: templates/plugins have to be GPL without an "exemption"? (fwd)

[Jon Daley]

 	Sorry - wrong person.  The FSF did get back to me, but not the 
softwarefreedom folks.

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Jon Daley wrote:

> 	Hrm.  The FSF never got back to me...  I'll email again.
>
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, Oscar Renalias wrote:
>
>> Thanks Jon, great work.
>>
>> Do you think that we need to get some legal advice from the Software
>> Freedom Law Center or does our attempt at providing this exemption
>> clause sound good enough?
>>
>> "We don't consider plugins or templates (e.g. that code that lives in
>> the plugins or templates directory of a LifeType installation) that is
>> created by a 3rd party to be a derivative work of the LifeType
>> software. We highly encourage you to release your plugins and
>> templates under the GPL, but you are free to use other licenses as
>> well"
>>
>> The only thing I would change is that I'd use the passive voice to
>> remove all those "we" and replace them with "plugins and templates are
>> not considered", "developers are encouraged", and so on. What do the
>> native English speakers think? :)
>>
>> On 9/25/07, Jon Daley <plogworld at jon.limedaley.com> wrote:
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:25:51 -0400
>>> From: Brett Smith via RT <licensing at fsf.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [gnu.org #343991] Re: [pLog-svn] templates/plugins have to be GPL
>>>      without an "exemption"? (fwd)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 08:32:33AM -0400, Jon Daley via RT wrote:
>>>>       So, the question is, can we use GPL2, but include a clause like
>>>> the one quoted below, or do we need a different license altogether to
>>>> allow people to write plugins and templates that are not GPLed?
>>>>
>>>>       If we can use a clause (we would prefer to stay GPLed), do you
>>>> know of a clause that is already written, rather than trying to write our
>>>> own, and likely missing something?
>>>
>>> Jon,
>>>
>>> You're free to grant exceptions to the GPL to allow combinations with
>>> proprietary software, yes.  Unfortunately, I'm afraid we don't have any
>>> text that's readily suitable for your situation.  The Software Freedom Law
>>> Center sometimes provides help in cases like this; you can learn more about
>>> them at <http://www.softwarefreedom.org/>.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> --
>>> Brett Smith
>>> Licensing Compliance Engineer, Free Software Foundation
>>>
>>> Please note that I am not an attorney.  This is not legal advice.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> pLog-svn mailing list
>>> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>>> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pLog-svn mailing list
>> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>>
>
> -- 
> Jon Daley
> http://jon.limedaley.com/
>
> Common sense is not so common.
> -- Voltaire
> _______________________________________________
> pLog-svn mailing list
> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>

-- 
Jon Daley
http://jon.limedaley.com/

Feeling like a one legged man at a butt kicking
   contest is not a fun place to be.
-- Pam Martin, original source unknown