Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: distorting Linuxsampler

On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 01:14 +0100, Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
> Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 April 2006 11:03, Dave Phillips wrote:
> >> Frank Barknecht wrote:
> >>> According to their words: "COMMERCIAL USE of the souce code,
> >>> libraries and applications is NOT ALLOWED without prior written
> >>> permission by the LinuxSampler authors" no professional musician is
> >>> allowed to use LinuxSampler except with a written permission.
> >> Frank, where did you get this text ? It's not the text I quoted from
> >> the LS README :
> >>
> >> "The LinuxSampler library (liblinuxsampler) and its applications are
> >> distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (see
> >> COPYING file), but with the EXCEPTION that they may NOT be used in
> >> COMMERCIAL software or hardware products without prior written
> >> authorization by the authors."
> >
> > Its my understanding of the GPL that you CANNOT apply additional
> > restrictions and still call it "GPL".
> >
> > I'd suggest they consult with an attorney before they write such
> > foolery.
> >
> >> This is from recent CVS sources.
>
> People, please calm down.
>
> 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@email-addr-hidden)
  and Christian Schoenebeck (cuse@email-addr-hidden)
  
  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.

Maybe I have the wrong tarball? (BTW, try to download 0.3.3 - let me
know how you manage to do that). If you go to the CVS site and browse
the 0.3.3 release branch you get the same thing in the README.

> b) linuxsampler CVS HEAD (IOW, all source code in CVS since 0.3.3
> release) is the one which The-Rather-Illegal-GPL-Exception applies;
> thats actually intentional; if you're a distro packager, do NOT pick it!
> being you debianese or not :) unless you get the explicit LS-devel
> permission to do it, of course, as stated on the infamous exception.
>
> Is that clear?

Not really, I keep seeing the above referenced README in 0.3.3. So,
unless I'm missing something, please stop saying that this is only
happening in CVS.

-- Fernando
Received on Mon Apr 24 04:15:08 2006