Derivative works under the vim license

[Ben Jackson]

Hi all,

I know it’s kind of tedious, but I have question about the vim license (:help license) specifically relating to the runtime files.

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.

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?

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

Thanks,

Ben

[Bram Moolenaar]

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 "my_...@home.wife" and refer to your
children as "forked processes."

/// Bram Moolenaar -- Br...@Moolenaar.net -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// \\\
\\\ sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///

[Ben Jackson]

Thanks Bram. Much appreciated. I’ll reach out to Charles.

> On 31 Dec 2021, at 23:13, Bram Moolenaar <Br...@moolenaar.net> wrote:
>
>