[LAU] Is LS licensed? (was: [LAA] [ANN] gigedit 0.1.0)

[Forest Bond]

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:15:59PM +0100, Keith Sharp wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 22:40 +0200, Lars Luthman wrote:
> > A copyright licence is a licence, not a contract. It can only grant
> > additional rights to the ones you are already given under your
> > copyright
> > law, not remove any of them. In virtually every country the copyright
> > holder can do whatever he or she wants with his or her own work, and
> > releasing it under a licence that grants additional rights to others
> > can
> > never change that.
> 
> In most countries (certainly the UK) a non-copyright holder starts from
> a position of zero rights.  The only way I can access a copyright item
> is by a licence from the copyright holder that grants me rights.  In the
> case of LS/libgig I am being granted two sets of (possibly) incompatible
> rights by two different licences from the same copyright holder.

This is not true.  You have fair use rights.

> I am being licenced use of LS under the terms of the GPL V2 + a
> restriction on redistribution as a commercial product.  I am also being
> licenced the use of libgig under a pure GPL V2 licence.  The problem is
> that the pure GPL V2 libgig "virally infects" LS and the result is a
> (possible) breach of the terms of the GPL V2, and the GPL V2 states that
> if you breach the licence all rights granted under it are withdrawn.  So
> at this point I have no licence to use libgig and I am in breach of
> copyright.

Only if you distribute binaries.  Compiling, linking, and using the software on
your end is fair use.

-Forest
-- 
Forest Bond
http://www.alittletooquiet.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20071018/8db77ba2/attachment.pgp