From: ·············@not.for.spam
Subject: Licenses from major lisp vendors
Date: 
Message-ID: <384dbf3b.2514794593@news.earthlink.net>
What do the licenses from the major lisp vendors allow
for redistribution etc.?  For example, suppose I were to
write a Smalltalk interpreter in Lisp, which would translate
the Smalltalk to Lisp.  Could that be prohibited by the
licenses on the grounds that it would compete with the
Lisp vendors?  What if my product is a command line shell
or some such product using a scripting language, and it
would translate the scripting language to Lisp?  Where
would they draw the line on what is or isn't allowed?
Obviously they wouldn't let me sell a Lisp development
system based on their product, but they should let me sell
something that uses a scripting language.  The question
is just where they draw the line between those extremes.

From: Stig Hemmer
Subject: Re: Licenses from major lisp vendors
Date: 
Message-ID: <ekv66ya8q2q.fsf@epoksy.pvv.ntnu.no>
Dear mr. Not For Email,

·············@not.for.spam writes:
> What do the licenses from the major lisp vendors allow for
> redistribution etc.?

In the general case, you should enter a dialog with a vendor to find a
solution that both of you can live with.  Talk to more than one if you
want to.

[...]
> The question is just where they draw the line between those
> extremes.

From what I've heard on this group, the vendors consider this on a
case to case basis.

Stig Hemmer,
Jack of a Few Trades.
From: Barry Margolin
Subject: Re: Licenses from major lisp vendors
Date: 
Message-ID: <19e34.27$xB.1169@burlma1-snr2>
In article <···················@news.earthlink.net>,
 <·············@not.for.spam> wrote:
>What do the licenses from the major lisp vendors allow
>for redistribution etc.?  For example, suppose I were to
>write a Smalltalk interpreter in Lisp, which would translate
>the Smalltalk to Lisp.  Could that be prohibited by the
>licenses on the grounds that it would compete with the
>Lisp vendors?  What if my product is a command line shell
>or some such product using a scripting language, and it
>would translate the scripting language to Lisp?  Where
>would they draw the line on what is or isn't allowed?
>Obviously they wouldn't let me sell a Lisp development
>system based on their product, but they should let me sell
>something that uses a scripting language.  The question
>is just where they draw the line between those extremes.

IANAL, but I can't imagine a realistic license that specifies what kind of
application you can write in it.  I don't see why they wouldn't let you
sell a Lisp development system based on their product, although you seem to
be pretty sure that it would be prohibited.  If you include a copy of their
Lisp as part of it, they might require royalties for that, but I can't see
them prohibiting it outright.

-- 
Barry Margolin, ······@bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.
From: Martin
Subject: Re: Licenses from major lisp vendors
Date: 
Message-ID: <82l8bh$ah3$1@supernews.com>
In article <················@burlma1-snr2>, Barry Margolin <······@bbnplanet.com> wrote:
>In article <···················@news.earthlink.net>,
> <·············@not.for.spam> wrote:
>>What do the licenses from the major lisp vendors allow
>>for redistribution etc.?  For example, suppose I were to
>>write a Smalltalk interpreter in Lisp, which would translate
>>the Smalltalk to Lisp.  Could that be prohibited by the
>>licenses on the grounds that it would compete with the
>>Lisp vendors?  What if my product is a command line shell
>>or some such product using a scripting language, and it
>>would translate the scripting language to Lisp?  Where
>>would they draw the line on what is or isn't allowed?
>>Obviously they wouldn't let me sell a Lisp development
>>system based on their product, but they should let me sell
>>something that uses a scripting language.  The question
>>is just where they draw the line between those extremes.
>
>IANAL, but I can't imagine a realistic license that specifies what kind of
>application you can write in it.  I don't see why they wouldn't let you
>sell a Lisp development system based on their product, although you seem to
>be pretty sure that it would be prohibited.  If you include a copy of their
>Lisp as part of it, they might require royalties for that, but I can't see
>them prohibiting it outright.
>

I don't know if it was ever tested in court, but Borland's licence used to 
forbid the use of their development tools like Delphi to develop tools with a 
significant overlap.

Martin
From: Bruno Haible
Subject: Re: Licenses from major lisp vendors
Date: 
Message-ID: <82p34p$cal$1@news.u-bordeaux.fr>
> What do the licenses from the major lisp vendors allow
> for redistribution etc.? ...
> What if my product is a command line shell
> or some such product using a scripting language, and it
> would translate the scripting language to Lisp?  Where
> would they draw the line on what is or isn't allowed?

The way we dealt with this problem in ILOG Talk, was to put the
development environment (compiler and module analyzer) in one
shared library and the runtime system (including `eval') into
another set of shared libraries. Customers wishing to distribute
the development environment library had to pay higher run-time fees.

                    Bruno <······@ilog.fr>