18 Sep
2008
18 Sep
'08
9:39 a.m.
On Thursday 18 September 2008 03:11:14 Roberto Gordo Saez wrote:
I'm replying to myself for clarifying this:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:57:52PM +0200, Roberto Gordo Saez wrote:
Well..... but does the author remain THE author once there are other
contributions in that file?
Some licenses like the GPL requires the
software to carry an appropriate copyright notice, and suggest to place
a notice in every file. I'm not sure it is a legal requirement of the
GPL to place a notice in every file [...]
That paragraph is over-simplified, there are many other things to take
into account. First one and most important is that the author is not
bounded by the GPL terms, so the requirement to place notices in the
files when they are changed can only be really enforced for
contributors.
I think it is always a good idea to place the license in every file,
though.
You found that the commercial exception is not included in the notices
in source files (I never look into linuxsampler sources myself), and
I completely agree that it is confusing. They should have placed the
notice there as well. As you said, authors would not be happy if you
try to use this fact to fork it under pure GPL, their intentions are
clearly different, and I prefer to respect their opinion and either
accept or reject their conditions. Also, I personally think that it
would not be legal, but if you are willing to try the fork, go
for it :-)
all the best,
drew