1 Jul
2006
1 Jul
'06
9:45 p.m.
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 00:43 +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 04:09:42PM -0400, Dave
Robillard wrote:
Come on, I think an overwhelming majority of the readers of this list
interprets "open source" or "free software" as "software for
which I can
get the source and modify and redistribute (including for commercial
purposes)" instead of "software for which I can read the source" or
"software for which I don't have to pay anything". People use old words
and phrases to mean new things all the time, mostly because describing
the new thing exactly would be too long and making up a completely new
word would just sound silly.
Whether or not you agree with the licensing
practise, calling it "open
source" is as misleading as calling MS shared source "open source".
Defend the license/exception if you want, but don't intentionally
mislead people about the licensing terms.
If the source is available for everyone to read, then it is open
according to the normal meaning of those words in English. What is
misleading is to attach any other meaning to them. It's a typical
marketeer's trick to redefine words or concepts that have a clear
an established meaning, and IMHO that's a disgusting practice. Besides that, DR is broadcasting plain lies. There is
nothing in
the Linuxsampler licence nor in that infamouse README that should
impede you using it for an album or concert you sell commercially.
A notice on the "Download" webpage on http://www.linuxsampler.org
says
LinuxSampler is licensed under the GNU GPL license with the exception
that
COMMERCIAL USE of the source code, libraries and applications is
NOT ALLOWED without prior written permission by the LinuxSampler
authors.
I would definitely say that using linuxsampler to produce an album that
you are selling or to perform a live concert to which you sell tickets
falls under "commercial use of the application". That is probably not
what the authors meant, but it's the natural way to interpret it.
--
Lars Luthman - please encrypt any email sent to me if possible
PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x04C77E2E
Fingerprint: FCA7 C790 19B9 322D EB7A E1B3 4371 4650 04C7 7E2E