[LAD] LV2 " isn't well thought out ?" LV2 in the Reaper sequencer

[Arnold Krille]

Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 schrieb Paul Davis:
> On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 14:39 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote:
> > Yes, there is a very valid reason for you not to do so: Adding something
> > to the gpl _and_ still calling it the gpl is not valid.
> Wrong.
> "This software is licensed under the terms of the Foobar License version
> 1.2.8 except that sections 9 through 10 of that license do not apply".
> Note the phrase "This software is licensed". These are followed by a
> description of the license terms. Let me provide a more extreme example:

Okay, I stand corrected (once again on the copyrights-field).
(Applies also to the mail from Christian.)

> I agree that the license is not well worded (it causes problems for
> Linux distributions, for example, in ways that I think are totally
> unintended). That doesn't make it an invalid license.

So the license is valid but the wording is unclear because distributions don't 
know wether they are allowed to ship it and users don't know wether they are 
allowed to sell the music they do with LS?

Arnold
-- 
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me 
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a "rm -rf /". Or ask your 
administrator to do so...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/attachments/20080124/afecaee6/attachment.pgp>