[linux-audio-user] The Open Music Resource Library - Licensing

[Darren Landrum]

Responses embedded. Thanks!

-Darren

On Friday, January 3, 2003, at 04:07 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:

> Allowing selling or disallowing it makes a fundamental difference. If 
> I for
> example write an open source game that uses loops from the OMRL in its
> soundtrack, it could not be part of a distribution like Debian, that 
> many
> companies sell on CD.
>
> If I construct a Pd patch to comfortably play those loops, it could 
> not be
> part of the AGNULA distribution, if it includes the loops, because 
> someday
> AGNULA CD's will get sold.

I don't think that's necessarily true. You can still write and 
distribute a PD patch that uses the loops. You just couldn't include 
the loops themselves. But your point is made, nonetheless.

Also, the use of the loops in a game falls under the "final product" 
use of the license, and would not be affected by the redistribution 
restriction.

> These are just two simple examples as to what problems the restriction 
> of
> selling could lead. I can think of many more. In the end, with this 
> license
> OMRL would be just another sampling library, that restricts 
> distribution.
>
> What about encouraging selling and encouraging distribution? The 
> license
> could have the viral GNU catch, that copying and reselling of a CD's
> contents shall not be restricted by a third party producer. This way, 
> some
> enterprise could make and sell CDs with OMRL, but I and anyone would be
> allowed to copy those for friends and enemies, if one feels the urge 
> to do
> so.

This is an interesting idea. Any other thoughts?

Regards,
Darren Landrum