Ben Jackson wrote:
> I know it’s kind of tedious, but I have question about the vim license > (:help license) specifically relating to the runtime files. Yes, copyright issues can be very complicated and tedious. At least, when you listen to a lawyer and try to do exactly the right thing. And find out the laws of what country actually applies (every country has it's own laws, there is no such thing as international copyright). The opposite is to assume nobody will complain, just copy stuff and hope you don't get blamed. > I have made a derivative work of the xxd.vim syntax file as > distributed by vim and as authored by Charles Campbell. This is to be > distributed as part of a vim plugin (Vimspector) that is itself > licensed under the Apache 2.0 license. By derivative work here I mean > that I copied it, made some relatively minor changes, and applied it > to a different filetype. > > Although Charles doesn’t specify, I’m assuming that the license of the > original xxd.vim is the same as that of vim (i.e. that in :help > license). Unfortunately, I wasn’t sure from that exactly what the > situation was for derivative works, as the license speaks mostly about > full copies of vim rather than “parts” such as the runtime files. The rule is that if copyright is not specified, a work is copyrighted by default (in nearly all countries). And, weird as the name my suggest the opposite, that means you don't have the right to copy. Not at all (with very few exceptions). > So in short the questions are: > > 1) Are the runtime files licensed in the same way as Vim proper ? > 2) If so, what are the license restrictions on creating derivative > works of runtime files? Well, although the file itself doesn't mention licencing rules, it is part of the Vim distribution, so you can assume the Vim license applies. If the author would not wanted that, it would be mentioned somewhere. AFAIK Apache 2 is a good license and doesn't conflict with the Vim license. > For the record, I have elected to include the entire header from > xxd.vim and the entire Vim license in the affected file for now, but I > just want to make sure that this is all legit/OK? > > https://github.com/puremourning/vimspector/pull/507/files#diff-d2d644aaf55a7738084ecc39d6576740c16c914e74602d205c97dd30f44036bd > > <https://github.com/puremourning/vimspector/pull/507/files#diff-d2d644aaf55a7738084ecc39d6576740c16c914e74602d205c97dd30f44036bd> I suggest to ask the original author if he is OK with this. Perhaps just ask to use the Apache 2 license to keep things simple. -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 170. You introduce your wife as "[email protected]" and refer to your children as "forked processes." /// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// \\\ \\\ sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/20211231231307.900EF1C0A5B%40moolenaar.net.
