Re: [LAD] [OT] LinuxSampler and GPL - some clarifications

Dave Robillard wrote:

> This is utterly false, and completely contrary to the entire purpose of
> Free Software, and the GPL. It's the very first 'freedom' (out of four)
> in the definition of Free Software, which was written by the same person
> as the GPL, for the same reasons.

Okay. Now let me add more fuel to this useless discussion [1]:

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/agpl-3.0.html

Note, that this license (Affero GPL) seems to be considered a "free,
copyleft license" by FSF itself.

Still, it restricts the actual *use* (and not just *distribution*) of
covered software. The exact type of restriction is different from one in
LinuxSampler license, but that's because it tries to solve a different
problem.

LinuxSampler license is intended to prevent hardware makers from
profiting off the LS project by making it a part of hardware box, AGPL
is intended to prevent Web companies from profiting (in some or other
way) off projects by combining it with other code and running it on a
public server.

Similarities:
- intention of prevention of uncooperative behaviour
- restriction of use
- encourages dual-licensing to companies that *really* want to use a
project in closed source derivatives
- based on GPL

Differences:
- LS bans: commercial && hardware
- AGPL bans: derived works && closed-source modifications && use on
network servers

Krzysztof

[1] Hopefully "fuel for thinking", not "fuel for name-calling". YMMV.

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Jan 29 20:15:12 2008