[linux-audio-dev] image problem

[Mark Knecht]

Hi,
   To be clear, I was in no way suggesting that I thought Paul should change
his licensing terms in any way. I'm just interested in exploring the
underlying reasons why there are not more Linux applications available at
the retail level.

   I personally think that this topic is interesting and enlightening. It is
(in some small way) about Linux Audio because we can discuss audio
applications. If people want this to go off line or can suggest a better
forum, please speak up.

   Let me ask another question in this area. Could someone explain the
implications of GPL/LGPL WRT proprietary applications that interface to Alsa
& Jack, along with their incumbent support programs like kaconnect and
qjackconnect?

   If Jack and Alsa were pushed in technical business development circles as
a way for Company A to enter the Linux market and be able to work together
with other existing applications, do the GPL/LGPL licenses of Alsa & Jack
create issues for Company A's proprietary code base?

   I see the open nature of Linux as best exemplified in the lower level
portions of the audio stack, and less so at the application level for the
reasons we've been discussing. As a person who is in business, but not in
this area, I have suspicions that these are the issues that are keeping
retail applications out of the Linux markets.

Thanks,
Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: linux-audio-dev-admin at music.columbia.edu
[mailto:linux-audio-dev-admin at music.columbia.edu]On Behalf Of Paul Davis
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 8:09 AM
To: linux-audio-dev at music.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] image problem


>Another difficulty with the GPL its somewhat sketchy legal basis.  (OT for
>LAD... Google if you want to know more).

the GPL is a contract freely entered into by the copyright owner and
the licensee. if the contract is held to be invalid, there is no
contract. at that point copyright law denies everyone except the
copyright holder any rights (except fair use) regarding the copyright
work.

i suppose you could call this sketchy. or not. ymmv.

>I've noticed that Dual licencing GPL/Commercial seems to fit in with the
>corporate mindset, however.  (e.g. Mysql).  Ardour/Libardour could go this
>route if all the developers desired it.

unlikely, but not impossible.

--p