On 06/28/2016 11:39 PM, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > However writing such a long new license text takes a load of free time (which > is already quite limited on my side), energy, research and finally a clear > consent by the developers.
I understand. I am however of the strong opinion that one should have a full understanding of how ones work is to be treated before publishing it and not gray areas with possible backdoors or loopholes (think Disney not LS). If LS licensing was clear, how do you explain those tiring discussion that you mention: > And to be honest, if you look at the discussions > here, do you really think that motivates i.e. me to do that? I mean there are > people coming to this list or contacting me directly, whom I never heard of > before in my entire life, not participated to this project in any way before, > and dozens of them are telling me in all kinds of harsh ways over and over > again what I "must" do with our software. I'm sorry I came across harshly. I didn't mean to offend nor push anyone into doing anything. I hoped to paint a clear picture based on facts about the current licensing situation. > There were even people before who > claimed that we would break laws by releasing the sampler under those terms > and other ridiculous things. > > So once and for all guys; if you want to discuss license issues: do your home > work (i.e. especially check the FAQs and the list archive by yourself), be > polite, don't be offensive (we are all doing this in our spare time, you > cannot force us to do anything), and be constructive: if you really want > license issues to be addressed, sit down, elaborate and suggest clear license > terms by yourself which could become a candidate to resolve those overall > issues. Ok here it goes: I suggest to take the GPLv2. amend Section 1 with the non commercial exception and change the name to LinuxSampler License. * "You may not use the source code, libraries and derived applications in any commercial hardware or software products." after the "You may charge a fee for the physical..." sentence in section 1. * Delete section 9. and the part referring to the FSF in section 10. * s/GNU/LinuxSampler/ * save the file as COPYING.LS * rename the currently COPYING to COPYING.GPLv2 * Add a new file: COPYING ------8<------ All source files that include a GPL boilerplate are subject to terms of the GNU General Public License which can be found in COPYING.GPLv2. The complete project and all other files are subject to the LinuxSampler License as found in COPYING.LS Linuxsampler is available for commercial licensing, a written permission by the authors is required for this. Please inquire with the authors. see http://linuxsampler.org/developers.html ------8<------ I think that would make things clear and may not even require agreement of all developers since it just a proper form of what you have currently and intend and should take less than 1h. ciao, robin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Attend Shape: An AT&T Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT&T Park in San Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries present their vision of the future. This family event has something for everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today. http://sdm.link/attshape _______________________________________________ Linuxsampler-devel mailing list Linuxsampler-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxsampler-devel
