23 Apr
2006
23 Apr
'06
10:48 p.m.
On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 17:23 -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 01:14 +0100, Rui Nuno Capela
wrote:
The above sentence ("This software...") is a self contradiction. It can
not be both "distributed under the GNU General Public License" and "may
not be used in commercial applications". There is no debate about it's
interpretation, because it does not make sense. The linuxsampler
authors must clarify and fix this sentence, it is not valid statement.
(I should maybe point out that if the non commercial exception is
intended, linux sampler is NOT open source software)
-DR-
Gene Heskett wrote:
I gotta repeat my own understanding of this issue, but I think it all
boils down to this:
a) linuxsampler-0.3.3 is the last known public release; as is, its pure
GPL, everyone if free to fork it according to FSF legalese ;)
This is not the first time I see something like this posted on the
lists, sigh:
--------
tar
xvjf
/projects/planet/source/rpms/linuxsampler/linuxsampler-0.3.3.tar.bz2
cd linuxsampler-0.3.3
more README
LinuxSampler - modular, streaming capable sampler
by Benno Senoner (benno(a)gardena.net)
and Christian Schoenebeck (cuse(a)users.sourceforge.net)
This software is distributed under the GNU General Public License (see
COPYING file), and may not be used in commercial applications
without asking the authors for permission.
--------
so, AFAIK 0.3.3 is already not really GPL for the reasons already listed
in the thread.