On Tue, 2013-12-31 at 18:32 +0100, Brendan Jones wrote: > On 12/31/2013 06:08 PM, Paul Davis wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Dominique Michel > > <dominique.mic...@vtxnet.ch <mailto:dominique.mic...@vtxnet.ch>> wrote: > > > > > > In gentoo, we have another politic with the licences. The free > > licence are accepted by portage by default, and for the other licences, > > the user must accept them on a per package basis. For linuxsampler, > > both the portage versions and the pro-audio overlay live version are > > considered as GPL2, as stated into the source code. > > > > > > It isn't clear that linuxsampler's license is legal. They use the GPL2 > > and then add restrictions, which is prohibited by the GPL. It may or may > > not affect the license, but either way it is a wierd situation. > > I think there is a definitive reason why upstream chose this path in > this case. I'm not privy to this, but it is sad, because it is an > awesome project, but we have to err on the side of freedom ...
I don't have time to search my mails now, but I had a discussion about this issue and there's a famous example, where somebody add something to the GPL similar to "only allowed to use the software for good, not for evil". I can search this "famous example" next year, but now my telephone, resp. the people calling me are impatient. I'm forced to join a party ;). It's not good to exclude linuxsampler, since not only the software is awesome, but also the free sample libraries are awesome. Again: Guten Rutsch! to all how are still in 2013 and a Happy New Year! to all who are already in 2014 Ralf _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev