[sword-devel] Bereans and Sword and GPL vs PD

[Lynn Allan]

Martin G. wrote:
>>> you are required to release it under the GPL since you copied source
code
>>> from Sword (e.g. rawverse.cpp) and mention crosswire as the copyright
holder
>>> of that code.

Lynn wrote:
> > I am not clear what it means to "mention crosswire as the copyright
> > holder". I would appreciate clarification. What rights, if any, do I
> > retain? What rights, if any, do I forfeit?
>
David wrote:
> Technically you keep all rights. The only rights you lose by making your
> software GPL are the ability to prevent other people from modifying your
work
> with making those changes GPL and the ability to not make that source code
> available. If you decide you don't want the project to be GPL anymore you
> must take any and all code that you don't have copyright on (which is only
> the stuff you write unless you have people give you copyright to their
stuff
> or you have permission) and you can then change the license. This does not
> however change the GPL status of the previous code.

Hi David and Martin,

Thanks for the helpful comments. However, I'm still unclear on what it means
to "mention crosswire as the copyright holder". I looked over the GNU GPL
guidelines on actually using GPL and am still less than 100% sure how to
proceed. Sorry.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html

Using the LcdBible software as a concrete example, I'm proceeding with these
assumptions, and would appreciate clarification that points out "the error
of my ways."

* First, IANAL and apparently I'm also not very alert. Sorry to keep asking
these questions. I never claimed to be "the brightest bulb in the box."

* Please note that I am not that interested in maximizing what I can claim
copyright on or avoiding responsibility for my cruddy code. I'm asking these
questions mostly to get concrete answers to murky questions. I speculate
that others on sword-devel have similar questions and this may serve to
illuminate.

* I infer that the above guidance to "mention crosswire as the copyright
holder" does NOT mean that The CrossWire Bible Society is the copyright
holder of the entire LcdBible software source code.

* I am ethically and/or legally obligated to specifically reference those
parts of the LcdBible software that are directly or indirectly from The
SWORD Project. Obviously parts of LcdBible are derived from sword software.
Some parts are not.

* From my reading of the GPL FAQ, it isn't absolutely necessary to
fastidiously give credit to "prior art", but this practice seems to be a
"should" and obviously recommended. I intend to be "fastidious" about this,
but I'm not 100% clear how to be fastidious.

* I can claim and retain copyright of those parts of LcdBible which I
"invented." For copyright, I do not need to do much searching, if any, to
see if another person has prior art and whether I am unknowingly infringing
on their copyright. It may well be the case that some 1988 DOS code
unrelated to Bible study previously used very similar logic to LcdBible, and
I am violating their copyright unintentionally. So be it.

* I am certainly OK with sharing 110% of the profits I realize from LcdBible
:-). I have negative 110% interest in having legal expenses to defend
against some 1988 DOS code I didn't know about. I would very much appreciate
input as to whether this is a legitimate concern.  My impression is that at
worst, I may hear from "VerseMonger" threatening legal action, to which I
can comply, fight, or turn over to Sword maintainers for "biting back".
Sigh.

* It becomes "murky" in the case of CanonVersifier logic, which is clearly
derived from VerseKey, but with radical simplifications. My understanding is
that the source code files for CanonVersifier.h, CanonVersifier.cpp, and
CanonVersifier.inl should specifically mention the current copyright holder,
and then I am allowed and encouraged to claim copyright for the revisions.

* My understanding is that I *could* neglect to recognize VerseKey prior art
and make a solo copyright claim on the CanonVersifier files. I consider that
this would be unethical and certainly not promote community fellowship.

<alert -- please ignore following rant, apology, and request for forgiveness
... unless you are interested in this newbie scribbler's opinion>
* At times some of us, myself included, may lose sight of this very
important, if not fundamental purpose of The CrossWire Society: we are to
take joy in doing what we can to build a community of believers who astonish
non-believers by the love we share among us.  We are not doing this to just
pump out code, I hope. Edify-The-Saints!

* I have been, frankly, appalled by the language and tone used in some of
the public sword-devel eMails, especially regarding GPL. Several of the
private eMails were harsher and more abrasive. I apologize to the entire
sword-devel community for my major responsibility that this had happened in
the course of these GPL threads which I instigated (and am continuing). I
claim that my motives, although at least partially fallen, were sincere to
clear up murkiness on my part and probably others.

* I further apologize that many of my initial eMails to sword-devel became
sarcastic pestering. Several of the "servant-leaders" of The CrossWire
Society have graciously pointed out "the error of my ways." I hope the last
several weeks of my posts have demonstrated some level of repentance with
regard to the language and tone of this scribbler's eMails.

* I sincerely request your forgiveness. In separate private eMails, I have
also apologized and requested forgiveness from several Sword maintainers. I
feel the magnitude of my errors (past and continuing) indicate that a
blanket apology to sword-devel is inadequate.

* It has been very tempting to take repeated advice/hints from several Sword
maintainers to "go away and never come back." For better or worse, I have
felt God's leading to try to make up for the continuing errors on my part
and attempt to contribute something concrete. You are certainly welcome to
add to the chorus of "Scribbler.
You.Are.A.Troubler.Of.The.SWORD.Project.Go.Away"

* It has been conveyed to me several times by Sword maintainers that the
unofficial policy of The CrossWire Bible Society is that newbies such as
myself are considered "worthless until proven useful", and, so far, I have
not been very useful. Mea culpa.
<alert over, all clear>

* Back to biz: unless someone clarifies the situation and advises otherwise,
I will not augment the existing VerseKey copyright by claiming copyright on
CanonVersifier logic. The current copyright holder on VerseKey will be
retained for CanonVersifier files.

* However, I wonder if similar thinking applies to
RemoveMostTagsAndExtraWhiteSpace code (RMTAEWS), as a further example. It is
a reverse engineering of The SWORD Project's FilterManager, but more of a
"white room" effort. I never could figure out the logic involved and it is
vast overkill (as well as possibly incomplete) for the simplistic needs of
LcdBible. Also, it results in a large amount of dependent object code being
linked, so the resulting executable would be far greater than the current
32kb LcdBible.exe. For these reason, I wrote RMTAEWS to accomplish 99%+ of
what FilterManager did. Seems like I can claim solo copyright on this logic.

* In this case of RMTAEWS, I am unclear what is appropriate. On the one
hand, I'm not that interested in the "glory and fame" of copyright, so I'm
inclined to assign the copyright to whoever has copyright on the
FilterManager. (Or possibly to my Savior? Col 3:23?)

* On the other hand, RMTAEWS is hardly a work of art. There are clearly some
"hold your nose" shortcuts employed to fit the functional equivalent of
FilterManager's nearly 270kb source code (perhaps ~3000 LOC)  into about 85
lines of code. It's not clear if the author of the very comprehensive
FilterManager would want to be associated with RMTAEWS. Is is acceptable to
simply use
Copyright: The CrossWire Bible Society?

<alert -- following scribbles have some comments that could be taken as
sarcasm -- please ignore if this offends you>
* Oddly, it added to my confusion to look over the existing source code now
in The SWORD Project. I felt that, surely, I can find some clarification in
how copyright is currently handled.

* I realize that for GPL purposes, a single LICENSE in the top directory
suffices. However, I did expect to find sterling examples of copyright
throughout the source code to provide guidance.

* Handling of copyright seems inconsistent within the hundreds of .cpp
source code files I looked at.

* Actually there is consistency of a sort, in that most have no mention at
all of anything related to copyright, whether GPL or otherwise. Most code
has simply little or no comments at all, much less anything to do with
copyright.  At first this surprised me, but then He reminded me that we are
all fallen humans.  Do as I say, not how I do?

* For the minority of .cpp programs that mentioned copyright, the norm was
something on the order of:
     -  Copyright 1998 CrossWire Bible Society
     -  CrossWire Bible Society
     -  P. O. Box 2528
     -  Tempe, AZ  85280-2528

* A minority of the .cpp files related to console apps and gui front-ends
did have personal copyrights to the actual author(s).

* I will followup with Joe Walker. I am interested in JSword practice and
whether if differs from The SWORD Project.

* Rather than complain and criticize, with this eMail, I offer to go through
CVS code and add appropriate copyright information where it is missing. I
hesitate to change copyright notices that might seem, to this scribbler, to
be inappropriate, however.

* If this offer is accepted by Sword maintainers and determined to be higher
priority that other "tasks on my plate", I would appreciate guidance on what
is appropriate as far as a copyright notice.

<alert over -- all clear>

* Again, I would note that I am not that interested in maximizing what I can
claim copyright on or avoiding responsibility for my cruddy code. I'm asking
these questions mostly to get concrete answers to murky questions. I
speculate that others on sword-devel have similar questions and this may
serve to illuminate.

TIA for your feedback.

Sharing the reason for the season,
http://learningcards.eeworks.org/EeCard01.html

Lynn A.
l.allan@att.net