From rpeng at jhsph.edu  Wed Jun 16 17:48:18 2004
From: rpeng at jhsph.edu (Roger D. Peng)
Date: Wed Jun 16 17:48:23 2004
Subject: [Rd] Copyright issues question
In-Reply-To: <MABBLJDICACNFOLGIHJOIELAEIAA.phgrosjean@sciviews.org>
References: <MABBLJDICACNFOLGIHJOIELAEIAA.phgrosjean@sciviews.org>
Message-ID: <40D06BC2.8080508@jhsph.edu>

Regarding question 3, it seems the answer is probably "yes" since, for 
example, there are packages on CRAN which restrict commercial use, and 
this is incompatible with the GPL.

-roger

Philippe Grosjean wrote:
>>Thomas Lumley answered:
>>
>>
>>>It might also be worth pointing out that the R Core Team's agreement is
>>>neither necessary nor sufficient.  The GPL permits whatever it permits,
>>>and R as it stands is covered by the GPL, rather than by what the
>>>developers would like on a case-by-case basis.
>>
>>>	-thomas
>>
>>OK, that is probably true. However, in GPL 2, you have:
>>
>>10. If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free
>>programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author
>>to ask for permission.
>>
> 
> 
>>There are two points here.  The first is that, as Duncan has pointed out,
>>the R distribution contains GPL code written by people other than us.  It
>>might well be possible to extract a working subset that we could release
>>under another license, but it would take quite a bit of effort.
> 
> 
>>The second point is that one of your concerns is about areas where the GPL
>>is not clear.  If it isn't clear to you then asking us won't help. We are
>>not experts in what the GPL means, nor do we have the authority to change
>>what it means.  It would still be polite to ask about uses of R that the
>>developers might personally object to, but there is no legal benefit in
>>doing so.
> 
> 
>>On the other hand, as the early history of KDE shows, it is possible for
>>free software to be produced and become popular even when there are honest
>>differences of opinion about the legalities.
> 
> 
>>	-thomas
> 
> 
> Thomas,
> 
> Sorry if I did not expressed correctly what I meant, but my query was to
> make sure all programs presented in the R GUI Projects web site have valid
> licensing terms. As it seems to be some difficults points with plugins and
> GUI, I ask the question to the R core Team and other developers on this
> list, just in case someone got a clearer answer than the one I can get
> myself.
> 
> Let's me reformulate the questions in a simpler way:
> 
> 1) Is it OK to develop GPL plugins for commercial software, and to bring
> functionnalities of these GPL software into those commercial programs,
> namely, plugins based on R for Excel, like RExcel and RxlCommander?
> 
> 2) Is it OK to make a GUI on top of R, and to distribute it under a
> different license than GPL, like Statistical Lab, Brodgar, or JGR?
> 
> 3) In case there is no clear answer to these questions (which seems to be
> the case), is it OK to support such plugins or GUIs that possibly violate
> the GPL license, for instance, by distributing them, or by placing links to
> them in the R GUI Projects web site?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Philippe Grosjean
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
> https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> 

-- 
Roger D. Peng
http://www.biostat.jhsph.edu/~rpeng


[Rd] Copyright issues question
Roger D. Peng