[Haskell-cafe] containers license issue

[Clark Gaebel]

It's not an algorithm. The source code of containers is derived from the
source code of another library.

  - Clark


On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Vo Minh Thu <noteed at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure what your point is.
>
> Re-implementing an algorithm is not a copyright infringement (nor is a
> propagation of the original work). Algorithms are not covered by
> copyright.
>
> 2012/12/12 Clark Gaebel <cgaebel at uwaterloo.ca>:
> > I think this is a potential problem, but, obviously, IANAL. [1]
> >
> > According to the GPL:
> >
> > To “propagate” a work means to do anything with it that, without
> permission,
> > would make you directly or secondarily liable for infringement under
> > applicable copyright law, except executing it on a computer or modifying
> a
> > private copy. Propagation includes copying, distribution (with or without
> > modification), making available to the public, and in some countries
> other
> > activities as well.
> >
> > and
> >
> > You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey,
> > without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force.
> >
> > and of course
> >
> > You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly
> provided
> > under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or modify it is
> void,
> > and will automatically terminate your rights under this License
> (including
> > any patent licenses granted under the third paragraph of section 11).
> >
> >
> > I believe that this counts as "propagation" of the original work, since
> it
> > would be considered "infringement under applicable copyright law". Now,
> the
> > wording in the GPL is a bit confusing on this point. I'm not sure if
> > propagation requires that the BSD3 that containers is licensed under must
> > remain in force, or the GPL on which the which is derived must remain in
> > force. Does anyone else have better luck interpreting this?
> >
> >   - Clark
> >
> > [1] Aside: Can we stop saying IANAL? Let's just all assume that, until
> > proven otherwise, no one here is a lawyer.
> > [2] Required Reading: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:00 AM, David Thomas <davidleothomas at gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Right. If either of the following hold, you should be able to carry on
> as
> >> you were (but double check with your lawyer):
> >>
> >> 1) The algorithm is borrowed but the code was not copied.  In this case,
> >> copyright doesn't cover it, and the GPL is inapplicable.  (Patents could
> >> conceivably be an issue, but no more so than if it was BSD code).
> >>
> >> 2) If you are not going to be distributing the code - either it is used
> >> for internal tools or in the backend of a networked service (which the
> GPL
> >> does not treat as distribution, as distinct from the AGPL).
> >>
> >> If a sizable chunk of actual code was copied, then the containers
> package
> >> would have to be GPL, and if you are using the library and distribute
> >> programs built with it then those programs must be GPL as well.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Vo Minh Thu <noteed at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 2012/12/12 Dmitry Kulagin <dmitry.kulagin at gmail.com>:
> >>> > Hi Cafe,
> >>> >
> >>> > I am faced with unpleasant problem. The lawyer of my company checked
> >>> > sources
> >>> > of containers package and found out that it refers to some
> GPL-library.
> >>> >
> >>> > Here is quote:
> >>> > "The algorithm is derived from Jorg Arndt's FXT library"
> >>> > in file Data/IntMap/Base.hs
> >>> >
> >>> > The problem is that FXT library is GPL and thus containers package
> can
> >>> > not
> >>> > be considered as BSD3. And it means that it can not be used in my
> case
> >>> > (closed source software).
> >>> >
> >>> > Is this logic actually correct and containers should be considered as
> >>> > GPL?
> >>> >
> >>> > The package is widely used by other packages and the only way I see
> >>> > right
> >>> > now is to fix sources to reimplement this functionality, which is not
> >>> > good
> >>> > option.
> >>>
> >>> GPL covers code, not algorithms.
> >>>
> >>> Beside, you can use GPL in closed-source code. GPL forces you to make
> >>> the source available when you distribute the software, but if you
> >>> don't distribute the software, there is nothing wrong to use GPL and
> >>> not make your code available.
> >>>
> >>> HTH, IANAL,
> >>> Thu
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> >>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> >>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> >> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> >>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20121212/ce0bc450/attachment.htm>