Re: [LAD] Impro-visor source code and fork

Dave Phillips wrote:
> Gene Heskett wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 19 July 2009, laseray@email-addr-hidden wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If anybody is interested, I have decompiled the latest Impro-visor version,
>>> which has only been provide as a binary (in contradiction to the terms of
>>> the GPL). So if you want the source code just let me know and I will send
>>> it.
>>>
>>> ....
>>>
>>>
>>> Apart from that, I will be looking into forking Impro-visor in the next few
>>> days. After making contact with the responsible parties about the GPL
>>> violations, I have received no reply and the source code has not been
>>> posted along with the binaries as is legally required....
>>>
>> Turn this violation over to the kind folks at the FSF. They have a legal team
>> to pursue such, and have AFAIK, a 100% batting record. Letters from attorneys
>> will generally get their institutional attention.
>>
>>
>
> Maybe. I submitted details re: the LinuxSampler license to the FSF and
> never heard a thing from them.
>
> For the OP's edification I submit this text from the GPL2 :
>
> *3.* You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
> under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
> Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
>
>
> *a)* Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
> source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1
> and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
>
> *b)* Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
> years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost
> of physically performing source distribution, a complete
> machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
> distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
> customarily used for software interchange; or,
>
> *c)* Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
> to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is
> allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received
> the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in
> accord with Subsection b above.)
>
>
>
> There is no legal requirement for the producer to post the source code
> along with the binary. The legal requirement is that he makes it
> available under conditions spelled out in the license.
>
> Best,
>
> dp

Yep! There was a similar problem for LMMS, because of Beatmachine Pro. I
didn't read the LMMS dev archive, but I noticed that Beatmachine Pro is
dead now, maybe there is a solution how to handle this in the LMMS dev
mailing list archive. I stopped receiving mails from the list, when I
started overboiling. I don't know if the LMMS folks solved it or if the
Beatmachine Pro guy becomes "insightful".
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sun Jul 26 20:15:02 2009