[linux-audio-dev] New form of GPL licence that protects Linux from proprietary world [was: New powermacs?]

Ivica Bukvic ico at fuse.net
Sat Jun 21 20:35:01 UTC 2003

Thanks! This really helped me see straight again :-).

However this brings up one interesting point/problem. Due to GPL nature
of Linux software, many of our efforts will seamlessly bleed into OS X
world since there are no restrictions as to which platform this software
is run on, and Apple made an explicit move to target open-source
developers and/or users by implementing Darwin and underlying
almost-Unix system.

To me this is a problem. Since, all our efforts and time will not lure
more people to Linux. Rather, our software will (perhaps) become popular
(pro-tools killer or whatever), but not necessarily on a Linux platform.
In the end, we will not reap what we have sown. Users on the OS X will
be theoretically able to run Ardour as much as we will, especially now
that jackd has been ported to OS X. To me, this does not seem right.

I would hence like to propose a new idea and you guys tell me what you

Perhaps we should make a mended version of GPL that would have exact
permissions like the original GPL license, but in addition would ask
that the software cannot be run on top of proprietary OS. This way, we
can make our software indigenous only to free/oss OS's and hence create
unique benefits that come from using Linux (and other open-sourced OS's,
obviously). Now, if we did this, then Linux in the long run would have a
definite advantage. As it stands now, it is only a matter of time before
all of the good linux audio software gets ported to (or ever worse,
becomes fully compatible with) OS X and other proprietary OS's and then
we end up putting all this effort into a community that in the end might
not grow at all, while offering benefits to those who did not chip in
any effort into the movement, nor do they understand the meaning behind
it. This certainly could pose problems for anyone who plans to make a
living in any shape or form associated with Linux and GPL'ed audio
software (Paul?).

What do you think?

Ivica Ico Bukvic, composer & multimedia sculptor

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-audio-dev-admin at music.columbia.edu
> admin at music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of R Parker
> Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 3:43 PM
> To: linux-audio-user at music.columbia.edu; linux-audio-
> dev at music.columbia.edu
> Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: [linux-audio-user] New powermacs?
> Hi Ivica,
> I'll rant on this for awhile.
> I guess it all depends on what you require. There's
> little doubt in my mind that the alternatives to linux
> based audio production will have to take very serious
> measures to compete with a looming problem. That being
> pro audio tools that are free from monetary costs and
> also developed in an open community that hinges its
> entire interest on intellectual freedom and are
> technically equal to or superior to their products.
> I don't see the 970 64-bit CPUs and built in optical
> audio i/o as being much competition. Hardware
> performance capabilties improve with the dawning of
> each new day.
> About a year ago I began to feel a good deal of
> anxiety about my decision to pursue a linux based
> professional audio solution. I make my living as an
> engineer/producer and need a working solution not just
> a philosophical day dream. I asked a couple guys what
> they thought about my concerns. They convinced to hang
> in.
> Mac has a new OS and it's a good one. They've got a
> DAW that runs natively and it's a good one. But that's
> still not enough draw for me because they're closed
> source cultures. I believe that if developements
> continue as they have during the last couple years the
> LAD community will win a big battle.
> I think many musicians feel no need or appreciation
> for the intellectual freedom that the linux
> communities thrive on. They simply want to swing the
> hammer and hit the nail. On one hand I can sympathize
> with that circumstance. But on the other hand it's
> depressing. I believe these people can't call
> themselves poets. How can anyone consider themselves
> an artist while choosing to support intellectual
> slavery? It's rediculous. They're not artists, they're
> misled apprentices at best and perhaps no more than
> monkey see monkey do automotons.
> A studio owner friend came by the other day. I gave
> him the LAD, jackd, ardour, jamin pitch. He proceeded
> to sing the praises of everything else. I accused him
> of living on self pride, magazine advertisements and
> of being afraid to admit that his protools investment
> was a mistake, etc, etc. He walked away angry. I
> thought good, get out of here. He came back 30 minutes
> later and said, "Ron, Ardour looks great but not
> everyone can be you." What he meant by that is Linux
> looms as a large learning curve and that unlike me, he
> doesn't have time to figure it out.
> It's very interesting that he became honest and
> admitted his investments and best effort are a
> mistake. Perhaps more importantly he came to terms
> with the fact that he's about to commit another large
> error by investing further yet into that proprietary
> world. Small studios like mine and his can't afford
> not to adopt the Linux solutions. After the financial
> benefits are realized we can learn to appreciate the
> intelectual opportunities.
> One problem I became aware during the exchange with my
> friend is that Linux is percieved as a technically
> difficult solution. That's an interesting perception
> and the LAD/LAU communities can deal with it. The
> larger Linux community has made a great deal of
> progress with this. How hard is it to install Red Hat?
> Maybe it's more difficult to configure linux. But it's
> alot less painful to purchase and configure x86
> hardware, rme cards, and a $2,000.00 digital mixer
> than it is to invest in a $15,000.00 Protools setup.
> OK, I'll shutup.
> ron
> --- Ivica Bukvic <ico at fuse.net> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Just heard the news (rumors) of new Macs that are
> > going to hit the
> > streets on Monday. Seems like Apple is finally going
> > to catch-up with
> > the PC world: there's talk of using IBM's PowerPC
> > 970 64-bit CPU's.
> > Makes me wonder what repercussions this will have on
> > the whole LAD/LAU
> > community, considering that they supposedly will
> > have built-in optical
> > audio I/O and with the recent announcement of
> > Trolltech to make OS X Qt
> > GPL-ed, leaves less and less advantages in Linux's
> > favor (apart from the
> > obvious untouchable open architecture and perhaps
> > faster growing
> > user-base -- according to recent news, can't
> > remember where I exactly I
> > read it tho, sale of factory-built Linux boxes
> > should surpass Apple's
> > this year, and that does not even include people
> > with home-built
> > machines and dual-booters).
> >
> > Please don't get me wrong. I am still in favor of
> > Linux, obviously due
> > to its open architecture. But at the same time I am
> > becoming a bit weary
> > of having to "hack" my advanced audio settings
> > rather than use
> > user-friendly tools. That, coupled with still anemic
> > direct vendor hw
> > driver support has really made me pay closer
> > attention on Macs (as scary
> > as that sounds). Yet, I feel such a sense of
> > accomplishment when my
> > Linux purrs just right with my desktop being
> > uniquely configured and
> > tailored to my needs. After all, I am a geek. :-)
> > And the inner struggle
> > goes on...
> >
> > Anyone care to comment or (please) dissuade me from
> > potentially making a
> > costly mistake? ;-)
> >
> > Ivica Ico Bukvic, composer & multimedia sculptor
> > http://meowing.ccm.uc.edu/~ico
> >
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list