1 Jul
2006
1 Jul
'06
5:51 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 20:33 +0100, Bob Ham wrote:
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 23:53 +0700, Patrick Shirkey
wrote:
Definitely, at the end of the day there is no way in hell their
"exception" would hold up in court, since they basically just mention it
in passing on the web page.
Regardless of what way the license goes, it definitely needs to be
clarified.
-DR-
Dave Robillard wrote:
According to this URL
http://cvs.linuxsampler.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/linuxsampler/src/Sampler.cp…
I have permission to use that particular file under the GPL, or (at my
option) any later version. Looking through a few other files and I see
I have the same permissions for those. Seems to be open source *and*
free software *and* released under the GPL *and* free-as-in-beer.
*shrug* On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 17:43 +0200, Luis Garrido
wrote:
>> LinuxSampler is not free software or open source software.
>>
> (sigh, must we, really?)
>
> It depends on who you choose to side with.
It's just using a modified GPL License which isn't clearly labelled as
such.