Could someone write a book about Lazarus and include screenshots?

[Pi]

If someone wanted to write a (shortish/simple) book about Lazarus programming, would they be able to do so, and would they also be able to include screenshots of the IDE showing  (book) author written code and author-written programs running, or would there be any copyright issues or permissions needed?

[Windsurfer]

Look here: http://wiki.freepascal.org/Pascal_and_Lazarus_Books_and_Magazines

[Pi]

Look here: http://wiki.freepascal.org/Pascal_and_Lazarus_Books_and_Magazines

Thanks. That tells you about books and magazines that have been published about Lazarus programming, though doesn't say what permissions (if any) were needed (or are needed) - ie. to include screenshots of the IDE in the book(s)/magazines/articles. Is the standard Lazarus IDE totally copyright-free, and therefore no permissions are needed (to include screenshots of it in a book/article etc.), or do you need to include any URLs or text (eg. URL of the GPL license or something?) or gain any permissions to include such screenshots in the book?

[wildfire]

Your question is a bit ambigous.

1) If by someone you mean anyone (including yourself) then including excerpts from a publication produced by someone else without their permission would be morally wrong and likely to be illegal (depending on the license they use for aforementioned  publication.

Books and Magazines copyrights are defined by the author.

2) If the work is entirely your own (or someone else's) work then you have those same rights. Regarding artwork (screen shots etc) I don't think there would be an Issue but you'd best verify with one of the core developers.

Just remember the Lazarus IDE License has little to do with other works, so don't assume that because the lazarus license is fairly lax, it does not mean that any derived works would have the same license.

[Windsurfer]

This link is worth reading: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/licensing

My take is that a screen shot does not need any permissions. It is only an image (light does not belong to anyone, at least in the UK).

It is considered good manners to acknowledge the source and authors and provide links.

Using code from copyrighted sources needs the author's and/or publisher's permission. This applies for up to 50 years from date of publication in the UK/EU and 70 or more in the USA. Other countries will have their own limits. It is quicker and easier to use new examples, rather than get permissions to cover all territories, unless it is covered by a Creative Commons or similar licence.

[Pi]

Thanks. I wasn't talking about including anything from any other publication. My question was only about if someone (ie. me) authored a book (including a print book), using my own example/tutorial code, with screenshots of the Lazarus IDE, about what permissions would be needed (if any) for the screenshoots included in my book which showed my example/tutorial code in the IDE and also talked about the IDE itself (eg. showing what to select/press etc. to do certain things within the Lazarus IDE to create various programs).

So from your post:

my take is that a screen shot does not need any permissions. It is only an image (light does not belong to anyone, at least in the UK).

it looks like I probably don't need any permissions. So thanks if that is the case. I thought certain designs were copyrighted - but it's probably okay for open source programs like the Lazarus IDE? - but if you were doing a book about a commercial program (eg. by Micrsosoft/Adobe - where the screen designs may be copyright) you'd probably need their permission first?

[Windsurfer]

A lot of US companies are very litigious, and code can be patented in the US, unlike Europe, where code is considered mathematics and hence not patentable. Hence, neither are the results.

From the lookalike versions of Linux for OS-X and Windows, I assume there is nothing to prevent this, unlike the inclusion of certain items of code (eg codecs) in some territories like the US and Japan.

If using Apple , Adobe or MS screen shots in a publication that I intended to make money from, I would clear it with each company, making clear which territories were covered. It might also be worth asking the FSF or similar organisation for their view.

[wildfire]

A lot of US companies are very litigious, and code can be patented in the US, unlike Europe, where code is considered mathematics and hence not patentable. Hence, neither are the results.

Not patentable (and I'm not sure about that ), I am sure however both code and visual works can certainly be copyrighted here in the UK.

Perhaps you could post some citations?

@OP I apologise for my misunderstanding, Yes including your own program listings in a publication is certainly not a problem. It's your work and you can do what you like with it.

--
The above is copyright 2016 to wildfire all rights reserved 

[Windsurfer]

Patents control the idea. Copyright controls the words. Code that expresses the same idea, but written differently, like fpc/Lazarus relative to Delphi is not a breach of copyright, but would fall when challenged by the Texan patent trolls, had it been patented in Texas. In Europe only copyright applies.

Copyleft 2016, Windsurfer