[LAU] Look ma, I'm in the paper :)

[Louigi Verona]

Massimo,

Let me give a go at your questions too.

*Can you use proprietary software without any limits?* Yes. Well,
disregarding the limits of the software itself. I cannot use a sound editor
to edit videos.

*Can you study the source code of a proprietary software?* Sometimes. Some
proprietary vendors do release their source code. Like, Microsoft
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_source>. In fact, seeing source code
does not make a program non-proprietary. There are open source proprietary
packages. Look at the code, study it, but you cannot release modified
versions.

*Can you modify the proprietary software?* Nope. However, neither can I
modify open source software. I am not a programmer, therefore theoretical
ability to modify, say, my favorite looper Kluppe is quite irrelevant to
me. I tried asking developers for help - nobody could do it. Period. For me
virtually zero difference. Kluppe might as well had been proprietary.

Now, to be fair, because it was open source and free, Falk could write a
patch for it to support JACK2. So small changes are sometimes a benefit.
But for larger changes? Almost no difference.

*Can you redistribute proprietary software?* Sometimes I can. Depends on
the license. Mostly I cannot. I also don't think that I need to
redistribute it. I can tell you that FL Studio is a wonderful DAW. You can
try it out, if you like it - you can pay money for it and work with it. If
you have no money, I don't think that it is my mission to get you FL
Studio. I might want to help you and buy a license for you, if I want to
help. But I don't think you or anyone else is entitled to a free copy.





On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:54 PM, jonetsu <jonetsu at teksavvy.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 14:08:36 +0100
> Massimo Barbieri <massimo at fsfe.org> wrote:
>
> > Can you use proprietary software without any limits? Can you study the
> > source code of a proprietary software? Can you modify the proprietary
> > software? Can you redistribute proprietary software?
>
> 1) Yes.
>
> 2) No.  I want to make music, not dispute algorithms.  When I put my
> nose in source code is to get paid, to bring bread and butter to the
> table.  When I'm, not paid, I like to make music.  And biking, and
> various fun things.
>
> 3) No.  See 2).
>
> 4) No.  I believe people has a right to earn a living.
>
> >> You could very well sell your music made with Open Source software.
> >> The FLOSS license should not apply to the products made with the
> >> software itself.
>
> > I can assure that I can apply to my music any license I want :-)
>
> Exactly.
>
> > I chose  a Creative Commons license Attribution, Share alike
> > (CC-BY-SA) and I used this license to publish final mix, single
> > recordings tracks and Ardour project that are a sort of "source code"
> > of our music. This is my way to say thanks to developers who wrote
> > Ardour, Hydrogen, CALF and many others great software ad free
> > software.
>
> And there can be a time also when one will want to make money.  Why
> not ?
>
> Ciao.
>
> --
> NP: "Multiverso" - Deus ex machina (Official video, Bologna, October
> 2016) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRrDJntwsa8
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>



-- 
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20161101/7bdfc65e/attachment.html>