19 Jul
2009
19 Jul
'09
3:49 p.m.
On Sunday 19 July 2009 13:24:25 you wrote:
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:59 AM,
<laseray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This is exactly the case and reason why I brought this up in the first place.
I have already stated that it uses jMusic code in other posts. That is
GPL licensed software. Just open up the Impro-visor jar file and find the jm
folder for yourself, as I previously stated. They even state somewhere on the
web pages for Impro-visor that they use jMusic in it! Talk about caught with
your hand in the cookie jar. I have even contacted the jMusic people to make
sure they are aware of this situation.
So let me make this clear. This has all been investigated more than a
year ago. And the situation is exactly as I have stated, with the present
violation being due to not releasing the source code along with the binaries
(or making it available by an offer included in the distribution).
For those who think otherwise I advise you to go to the FSF site and read the
FAQ page about the GPL licenses. Many people do not properly understand or,
indeed, misinterpret how the license must be applied. That page clears all
that up once and for all. And that is what I am going by, in conjunction with
the license text.
Raymond
To paraphrase the GPL, "the source code must
be available along with the
binary in the same/normal medium of distribution or a written offer
(valid for three years) must accompany the distribution stating that the
source code can be obtained, for a minimal fee".
No, this *may not* not the case here.
The GPL is a license issued by the copyright holder to others that
describes what they may do with the material and under what
conditions. The GPL license for the material does NOT apply to the
copyright holder. They may do whatever they want.
The only thing that makes the terms of the GPL of potential interest
here is if this application is linked with other GPL'ed code in a way
that makes it a derivative work. I do not know if that is the case.