10 Dec
2005
10 Dec
'05
10:52 a.m.
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 08:33:58 +0000, Pete Leigh wrote:
On 08/12/05, Paul Davis
<paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
there is more going on there than almost nobody
on this list except for
the LS authors and myself is aware of. it would be wise for everyone to
not judge this admittedly very unpleasant change in the license without
being aware of the reasons why it occured. unfortunately, it is not
possible to explain any more.
Still, without explaining any more, would it be an idea for the authors to
indicate what their likely response would be under some easily imaginable
scenarios, like: "I'm about to release a commercial album where linux
sampler was used in production. May I?" From my understanding, it is the commercial
exploitation of the software,
rather than the sale of music written with the
software that they are
trying to limit: so if you were to build a linux based synth, and sell it
with LS installed, they would like to get some money from you for it,
which they would not be able to do under the GPL.
James