24 Jan
2008
24 Jan
'08
9:41 a.m.
Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 schrieb Fons Adriaensen:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 04:02:29PM +0100, Esben Stien
wrote:
Yes, there is a very valid reason for you not to do so: Adding something to
the gpl _and_ still calling it the gpl is not valid. So in fact LS has _no_
valid license. The only thing protecting it is the natural(?) copyrights of
the ones who invented it.
No one else is allowed to copy or distribute (or maybe even use) it without
there explicit statement. You can give that statement by publishing it under
a certain license but the gpl itself states that making additions to it and
still call it gpl is invalidating it...
So please(!) LS-devs, give LS a valid license, be it open source or not, free
as in defined-by-the-fsf or not.
Arnold
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a "rm -rf /". Or ask your
administrator to do so...
"Benno Senoner"
<benno.senoner(a)googlemail.com> writes:
Isn't this a bit extreme ?
I don't want to start a new war
on the definition of the word 'free' in this context, but
I just note there is _nothing_ in the LS license that stops
me from using it without paying a cent, or even to modify it
and make the modified version avaiable to whoever wants it.
I use it almost every day, and enjoy doing so. after all we share all the same goal of better
and free tools to
make music
I'm confused, because this is not true. Your software,
LinuxSampler,
is not free software. You've also refused to participate in all the
threads we've got on this list about your license, which is the source
of so much frustration.
As far as I can see, we don't share any goals?.