17 Oct
2007
17 Oct
'07
4:34 p.m.
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 19:25 +0200, Arnold Krille
wrote:
it is my belief that all the people listed in the AUTHORS file
(including yours truly) are aware and in deed participated, in their own
call, to the linuxsampler license debate. unfortunately afaict it's
still an unfinished business... ;)
bye
--
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc(a)rncbc.org
I am not a lawyer, but neither the COPYING-file
nor the (randomly picked)
src/linuxsampler.cpp state anything but gplv2 (or later) for the license.
The README states something about getting the authors authorization to use the
app in commercial software or hardware. While I think this is some legit
modification because they don't want their work to be used commercially
without them knowing, I don't think this rule applies as they probably didn't
ask all the participating authors (and the AUTHORS file states quite a few)
for their permission to change the license.
I'm not a lawyer either. Section 10 of GPL2 includes:
"You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the
rights granted or affirmed under this License."
So, you can't add restrictions (in this case commercial use of the
code). If you want to add restrictions then you can't use the GPL. At
least that's my reading.
-- Fernando
Which leads me to believe that linuxsampler is
(still) free software as in
free-software-defined-by-the-fsf. Or anyone who made a contribution to
linuxsampler before the change in the license and wasn't asked about the
license-change can request for reversing the license-change or their
contribution to be removed from LS.