4 Dec
2003
4 Dec
'03
7:34 p.m.
Renaming doesn't violate the GPL. You are free to do anything with the
code except try to distribute binaries and keep the source code closed.
Also, you do have to include a copy of the license. Other than that,
pretty much, anything goes (with the exception of removing copyright
notices).
Jan
On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 17:08, Anahata wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 01:33:53PM -0800, Brian
Redfern wrote:
I don't know, if you're selling people
audacity on cdrom, as long as you
include the source I wouldn't think its illegal
For minimal compliance with the GPL he only needs to include a copy of
the GPL on the CD and at least be prepared to supply source to anyone
who asks for it. (AIUI)
I don't know why anyone
would buy it on cd
For the same reason that people pay for Linux distributions or for other
GNU software on CD - convenience/laziness. Especially as a whole lot of
plugins are included on the CD (I don't think you get those with the
standard Audacity package, do you?)
As discussed recently on this list, GPL sets no limits on how much you
can charge for something if some mug is silly enough to pay for it :-)
It's not quite the same as boxed sets of Linux distros where there is a
support element in what you are paying for.
The attraction of trying to do this with Audacity in particular is that
it's a Windows program (as offered), so there's a huge potential market,
and Windows users are less likely to be aware of free software in
general and Audacity in particular, and therefore won't understand that
the program is there for the taking.
The only thing that looks supect to me is the deception inherent in the
renaming of the package, but I don't know what the GPL and the law have
to say about that.
--
Anahata
anahata(a)treewind.co.uk -+- http://www.treewind.co.uk
Home: 01638 720444 Mob: 07976 263827