8 Dec
2005
8 Dec
'05
6:59 a.m.
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Pete Leigh wrote:
But if he's accepted the LS license being talked
about, it's not the
GPL, it's the GPL plus an exception disallowing commercial use.
A different beast.
What I was caught up with was §6 of the GPL where it says
"You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise
of the rights granted herein."
But apparently this only affects the right to "copy, distribute or
modify" the software, not acctually running it.
OTOH this raises the interesting question: what's to stop me from
taking the GPL source, modifying it a bit and releasing it as
LinuxSamplerXP with no extra restrictions? The source is GPL and
according to §6 I have GPL, and only GPL, rights to modify the source
and create a derivative work. I then release it as "pure" GLP.
I'm by no means a GPL expert. These thoughts are merely toughts.
I'd love to hear from someone with proper GPL knowledge.
Regards,
Peder