Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Broadcast 2000 removed from public access
From: Son of Zev (sonofzev_AT_labyrinth.net.au)
Date: Mon Oct 15 2001 - 16:36:04 EEST
Hi All
Hey I know this is a rather late comment - but I read everyone elses
contribution and I feel I should add.
At this stage I am unaware of any precedent to this kind of claim. The claim
against mp3/p2p software was an issue of music copyright and the illegal
distribution of it - however no one ever sued anyone for making a recordable
tape deck or video player. There has been no claim against any company or
author with regards to hardware damage and due to the complexity judges dare
not rule a software company responsible for financial damages caused by a
bug. As for illegal use of a software well the crackers of win software have
already solved that one. You have a better argument writing audio software
it's intended use is legal and is easily defendable as such.
It is a shame that the level of corporate bullying is more extreme in the
U.S. than it is in many other places. ALthough the concept of Bush outlawing
open source or GPL'd code is completely ridiculous - how could it be
justified, enforced, or paid for .... The concept would be too outlaw
something in the US that isn't elsewhere - many governments benefit from open
source software so I can't see a unified international movement on this one.
I also believe that the win and mac based "professional" audio softwares all
have the same type of warranty free agreement even though some issue licenses
to hardware companies or even produce their own. The production of hardware
and softare could cease altogether if a succesful claim were made on these
grounds and I can't see it happening.
When it comes to IP then you should also be pretty safe Gates helped us here
when he convinced early judges (sorry I don't have the dates) that while the
appearance of his OS was similar to Steve Jobs' the functionality was
completely different . ALso why wouldn't any of the sequencer/hd recorder big
boys already have tried it against the little newcomers (some of which are
getting quite big)
The only issue I can see is AC3 coders/decoders ..... Hopefully mp3 has
proved over wma that having an openly available format is more economically
succesfull than a closed one...... I'm more concerned that the big boys
involved with mLan see likewise and make it available to all.
As for point to point and copyright of music issues that's really a
completely different kettle of fish. My personal idea is that musicians/
copyright owners should be able to issue a "free-usage and not for profit
distribution" license on the music they choose (similar to gpl i.e. sample
and reuse this as well just send me a copy of your track/version) thereby
still reserving the right to make an income out of music they wish to sell
on cd or vinyl format.. While a low blow the RIAA were within their rights to
stop what is illegal distribution of copyrighted music - by law..... If you
want to change that vote for a governement that will. Whether going after the
coders themselves was either just or ethical I have other opinions unless
they were the people involved in the corporate structure of that particular
company that WAS making a profit from the free distribution of copyrighted
music. (think advertising space)
Sure major artists may not be able to issue "free music" due to restrictive
recording contracts but independant musicians and labels can do this maybe
this is one way we can tip the balance here.
However that is really a digression from the main point of this thread. Which
is Broadcast2000 ........ if people have the GPL sources and wish to
continue , please do - unless people can "revoke" GPL licenses although I
can't see that in the terms. (and a personal request to make it truly viable
for both audio and video put SMPTE/MMC sync functionality on to it... so it
can lock to external video and audio devices correctly - I know Paul -
wordclock would be paramount too)
MOre to the point - don't let this stop any of you from your work - this is
exactly what the corporates would hope for that the envionment is scaring the
little guys (especially the ones who don't charge anything) out of the
playing field ... leaving us with old and outdated ideas for software being
developed by sluggish corporate structures....... remember you have the
ability to write code - it is your right and privilidge to decide what you do
with your IP.... the more that is released as GPL the less possible it is to
seize it for profit as it becomes a more accepted way of computing.
Anyway, don't panic about the world , and keep writing your fabulous magic.
Remember as far as hd recorders to compare with the commercials we still have
some excellent stuff on its way (Ardour , Mustajuuri and in a way MusE).
Maybe it will come to the point where one needs to become a "member" of a
non-profit organistation to even use software so that agreements concerning
no warranty can be held down harder..... I hope not .
Keep SMiling
Allan Klinbail
If? Records Melbourne Australia
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:31, Paul Davis wrote:
> >Well, that's really sad. Let's hope that some people may go on with the
> >previous GPL code...
>
> it also strikes me as mostly bullshit, though i'd want to speak to a
> lawyer before concluding that completely. GPL'ed software is almost
> universally made available with no warranty. as a post on slashdot
> points out, Microsoft could be sued up the wazoo if it weren't for its
> "no warranty" clause, and it never has been. why broadcast2000 would
> be any different, given its similarly worded no-warranty clause, i
> don't know. the key question for a lawyer would be how much it would
> cost to establish the validity of the no-warranty clause.
>
> as for fears about IP infringement, thats a different story
> altogether, and a lot more justified in the current climate. i just
> hope that i can take on any such challenge if it comes toward ardour
> ... i intend to try.
>
> --p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Oct 15 2001 - 16:33:40 EEST