| [epl-discuss] Status of generated code regarding "Derivative Works" |
|
Hello, As for the previous EPL version, there was a vague regarding the status of generated code, whether they are derivative work of the generator itself or not. Basically (if my understanding is correct), it is up to the code generator implementers to tell whether the generated code is subject to the same terms as the generator itself, or whether it can be considered as a complete separate work. This leads to ambiguous situations, where even a license expert (and I am not talking about myself) has difficulities in telling whether the generated code can be considered as original code or not. A colleague of mine tried to dig this case for EMF generated code (which I think we all consider as brand new constraint-free code) and never got any satisfying answer, even after trying to mail the EMF project (with no response). With a brand new definition or "Derivative Works", this would be great to clarify this situation (especially with the rise of Xtend generators). I guess it would be in the license's spirit to declare generate code as original non-"Derivative Works", unless explicitely specified by the generator implementers. And if so, how could the generator implementers specify that the generated code is subject to particular copyright and licenses ? Possibly by inserting the copyright and license directly in the generated code ? Could we then forbid that code modifiers delete the generation of such notices ? This case may raise lots of additional questions. But I think it would be great if it were crystal-clear in the EPL v2. Best regards,
|
