[LAD] GPL Violation Alert! - Sorry if this is a duplicate

[jaromil]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 03:45:13PM +0100, Dr Nicholas J Bailey wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 Aug 2009 09:10:21 Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 08:33:22AM +0100, Nick Bailey wrote:
> > > Well, calling it  your own is out of order, but  as long as they
> > > release their source  code as required by the  GPL, then selling
> > > it is a Good Thing (TM). I  hope the LADs agree with me. I would
> > > certainly be  delighted if my GPL'd stuff  (which isn't directly
> > > related to LAD) got sold. It would mean more GPL'd applications.
> >
> > Two question arise:
> >
> > - Is a program that loads  LADSPA plugins (at run time) a 'derived
> >   work'  ?  Note that  anyone  can  create  a 'clean'  version  of
> >   ladpsa.h, as some people did with the VST headers.
> 
> My understanding is "Yes". If it's linked, it's GPL'd. You can run a
> separate  process and  communicate  through sockets  etc, that'd  be
> separate. But AFAIK, same memory space => derived work.

i guess your understanding is correct.

in a past thread (feb. 2004) on the piksel list regarding licensing of
video plugins,  i've asked the FSF  regarding this issue  and got this
reply:

  "Legally  speaking,  there's  never  been  a  case  which  discussed
   this.  FSF   believes  that  dlopen   operates  the  same   way  as
   compile-time linking."  Dave Turner GPL Compliance Engineer

ciao

- -- 

jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org

GPG: 779F E8B5 47C7 3A89 4112  64D0 7B64 3184 B534 0B5E

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkp8K/wACgkQe2QxhLU0C152dACgpcieOzJcSM79DKwZ4jDamK28
sQ0An14n5WVLQ1fthbvaaGeq3DUIVdr8
=Xdi6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----