[LAU] [LAA] [ANN] gigedit 0.1.0

[Fernando Lopez-Lezcano]

On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 19:25 +0200, Arnold Krille wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2007 schrieb Mark Knecht:
> > On 10/17/07, Arnold Krille <arnold at arnoldarts.de> wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, 16. Oktober 2007 schrieb Marcos Guglielmetti:
> > > > Will gigaedit be able to play .gig files by itself?
> > > > I mean: linuxsampler is not free software as in freedom, so, It would
> > > > be nice to have some replacement.
> > > What is hindering you on using the latest GPL-version? Which afaik
> > > (without checking) is the latest stable released version anyway...
> > I believe the point is that all of the latest versions, for at least 2
> > years now, are not GPL. The license was modified.
> 
> I am not a lawyer, but neither the COPYING-file nor the (randomly picked) 
> src/linuxsampler.cpp state anything but gplv2 (or later) for the license.
> The README states something about getting the authors authorization to use the 
> app in commercial software or hardware. While I think this is some legit 
> modification because they don't want their work to be used commercially 
> without them knowing, I don't think this rule applies as they probably didn't 
> ask all the participating authors (and the AUTHORS file states quite a few) 
> for their permission to change the license.

I'm not a lawyer either. Section 10 of GPL2 includes:

"You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the
rights granted or affirmed under this License."

So, you can't add restrictions (in this case commercial use of the
code). If you want to add restrictions then you can't use the GPL. At
least that's my reading. 

-- Fernando


> Which leads me to believe that linuxsampler is (still) free software as in 
> free-software-defined-by-the-fsf. Or anyone who made a contribution to 
> linuxsampler before the change in the license and wasn't asked about the 
> license-change can request for reversing the license-change or their 
> contribution to be removed from LS.