Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Maxim Cournoyer (06 Dec 2023 22:46 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (06 Dec 2023 23:06 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (07 Dec 2023 18:31 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (07 Dec 2023 19:00 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (07 Dec 2023 20:12 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Maxim Cournoyer (09 Dec 2023 03:28 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Lassi Kortela (09 Dec 2023 16:18 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Maxim Cournoyer (09 Dec 2023 23:06 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Lassi Kortela (10 Dec 2023 12:45 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples John Cowan (10 Dec 2023 13:15 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Maxim Cournoyer (10 Dec 2023 16:03 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Maxim Cournoyer (10 Dec 2023 15:59 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Lassi Kortela (10 Dec 2023 16:32 UTC)
Re: First batch of SPDX annotated SRFIs examples Maxim Cournoyer (12 Feb 2024 19:48 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (08 Dec 2023 16:21 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (08 Dec 2023 23:37 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (09 Dec 2023 00:01 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (09 Dec 2023 00:11 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (08 Dec 2023 23:31 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (08 Dec 2023 23:35 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Dec 2023 08:06 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Dec 2023 14:19 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Dec 2023 16:08 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Dec 2023 16:02 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (10 Dec 2023 02:21 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Dec 2023 17:28 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (10 Dec 2023 02:30 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (12 Dec 2023 00:15 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (12 Dec 2023 18:44 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (13 Dec 2023 00:26 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (18 Dec 2023 19:41 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (18 Dec 2023 23:03 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (13 Dec 2023 00:41 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (12 Dec 2023 07:01 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (13 Dec 2023 00:24 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Daphne Preston-Kendal (09 Dec 2023 10:26 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (09 Dec 2023 17:35 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Daphne Preston-Kendal (09 Dec 2023 21:09 UTC)
Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Arthur A. Gleckler (10 Dec 2023 02:18 UTC)

Re: Proposal to use SPDX for SRFI license/copyright declarations Daphne Preston-Kendal 09 Dec 2023 21:09 UTC

While I can see that in theory a specification might in some cases be a derivative work of an existing specification for the same API, it cannot be the case that all re-specifications are. APIs themselves are (probably) not copyrightable;* therefore it must be possible to document them in some way that does not infringe upon the copyright of existing documentation for them.

(* AIUI (usual provisos apply), the Google/Oracle case on this subject was resolved by the court saying that, even if the API is copyrightable (which was not decided affirmatively), a clean re-implementation of it such as Google’s would be fair use.)

In any case, as long as SRFI text is MIT licensed (a curious choice for documentation to begin with, but we can live with it), this is a bit of an academic point.

> On 9 Dec 2023, at 18:35, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If I describe the rules of a game in my own words, it is not a derivative work of the original specification of the game's rules, is it?
>
> Assuming that no sentence was copied verbatim, the section [1] of the Guile Manual is not the derivative work of any RnRS, is it?
>
> --
>
> [1] https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/guile.html#Definition
>
> Am Sa., 9. Dez. 2023 um 18:28 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 5:26 AM Daphne Preston-Kendal <xxxxxx@nonceword.org> wrote:
>
> I’m less concerned about this as there are various solutions (including simply rewriting the specification text for any adopted procedures/syntax/etc.) we can adopt.
>
> Actually that doesn't work either, because you can't prepare a clean-room *specification* unless you have a specification for the specification, which pretty much is a specification.  So your supposedly clean specification ends up being a derivative work of the original specification.
>
> It's annoying that the Scheme specifications are not (recognized as) libre, but there are worse things: gcc is libre software, but the various C specifications are neither libre nor even available gratis.