[LAD] [LAU] zitaretuner
k.s.matheussen at gmail.com
Sat Oct 11 15:52:28 UTC 2014
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Neil C Smith <neil at neilcsmith.net> wrote:
> On 11 October 2014 12:51, Kjetil Matheussen <k.s.matheussen at gmail.com>
> >> On 10-10-2014 21:14, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> >> > And as a final topping on the cake, that whole crappy thing is
> >> > presented as if I were the author of it all. No mention at all
> >> > that things have been modified, and by whom or why. This alone
> >> > is a clear violation of the license under which zita-at1 was
> >> > released. And whoever did it doesn't even have the courage to
> >> > identify him/herself.
> > I can understand you are very angry about this. Does GPL
> > really allow someone to use someone else's GPL code,
> > release it, and pretend everything was written by the original
> > person?
> Unlike what Peder said above, no it doesn't.
> "5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.
> a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it,
> and giving a relevant date."
> That's from v3, but v2 has a similar statement IIRC.
> v3 also allows to add the following optional terms
> "d) Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or
> authors of the material; or
> e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade
> names, trademarks, or service marks; or"
> which would allow Fons to protect his name and "zita", though I guess
> not retrospectively.
> Please don't use this as an excuse to turn away from the open-source
> ethos - there are many pros, if a few con(artists)s! ;-)
Thanks for making that clear. Fons wrote it too though, as you quoted,
but it seems like I had forgotten that part when I was finished reading
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Linux-audio-dev