1 Jul
2006
1 Jul
'06
7:17 p.m.
Indeed. A sampler you can't even use on an album
you intend to sell or
in a performance you sell tickets to isn't exactly the most useful thing
in the world.
While the LS license wording undoubtedly admits your interpretation:
"LinuxSampler is licensed under the GNU GPL license with the exception that
COMMERCIAL USE of the souce code, libraries and applications is
NOT ALLOWED without prior written permission by the LinuxSampler authors."
I think they are referring to other kind of commercial use. As taken
from the FAQ:
"You are NOT ALLOWED to use LinuxSampler source code, libraries or
applications in COMMERCIAL hardware or software products without prior
written authorization by the authors."
Probably they had in mind something like Oasys, which is based on Linux
http://www.korg.com/gear/prod_info.asp?A_PROD_NO=OASYS
and don't want their work to become part of a big company product
without having the OSS community getting something in return. But,
yeah, that clause is a royal mess and it needs to be clarified.
Legalese apart, since I don't plan to sell it or to produce a platinum
album, it seems to me quite open and free, even if it is not Open(tm)
and Free(tm) (it would seem that the words "Open Source" are not open
source, anymore, how cool is that?) At the very least I can learn a
lot from the available source code, I can tweak it to my needs and I
can enjoy the sounds it makes in non commercial situations (and
probably in commercial ones if I understood the intentions of the
authors, but I wouldn't risk it without a clearer wording of the
clause in question.) And as I said before, LS 0.3.3 _is_ 100% GPL,
only the CVS version is subjected to this licensing.
Luis