>>>>> "Rafael" == Rafael Laboissière <[email protected]> writes:
Rafael> Hi, Thank you all for your insightful comments on this
Rafael> thread [1].
Rafael> I am cc'ing this reply to the maintainers of the lame
Rafael> package. I just noticed that an fft.c file identical to
Rafael> Praat's one is also included in the lame source package
Rafael> [2]. Unlike what is done in the Praat package, an entry for
Rafael> that file is included in the lame's debian/copyright file
Rafael> [3] in the following stanza:
Rafael> Files: libmp3lame/fft.c Copyright: © 1988-1993, Ron
Rafael> Mayer © 1999-2000, Takehiro Tominaga License: GPL-1+
Rafael> Comment: No version of the GPL is explicitly given.
I actually think what lame does is reasonable:
* the author is happy with a liberal grant
* But believes Stanford might limit that grant to GPL.
* There are patent issues but we're ignoring them: those patents have
expired.
So, we're taking on some risk by assuming that the software is GPL, but
we're taking on the same risk as the rest of the free software community
is doing by distributing lame.
Given the parties involved, I think that risk is reasonable.
I do think it is impossible to look at licensing issues without thinking
of it in terms of what risk you are willing to take on.
--Sam
