Sorry for this self-reply follow up post, I forgot to include a pertinent reference.
On 06/28/2016 09:41 PM, Robin Gareus wrote: >> That commercial exception, being ( snipped and quoted for the sake of >> pedantism ), >> >> '..under the GNU GPL with the exception that USAGE of the source code, >> libraries and applications *FOR* COMMERCIAL HARDWARE OR SOFTWARE >> PRODUCTS IS NOT ALLOWED without prior written permission..' > > > GPL section 6 says > > "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise > of the rights granted herein." > > So how does that work out? > > That additional commercial exception contradicts the GPL on which it is > based on and as result LS does not have a license. It is fully copyrighted. > > It could become an new license: GPL without section 6 but with that > exception added instead. Then again this is at odds since one is not > allowed to modify the GPL itself. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#ModifyGPL > You can get around that by calling it > the LinuxSampler-License and not mention the GPL at all. > > > As side-note, generally source-code header license for individual files > trumps the license file from the collection. A quick grep shows that the > source itself has a GPLv2 boilerplate with no commercial exception > (unless I've missed some). > > So if one were to take the individual source files and re-roll them into > a new archive... ?! > Also let me add that I by no mean want to encourage that. I'd like users to respect the intention of the authors of this IMHO great software. But I very much wish for these intentions to be clearly solidified by a proper license (until a time comes where software licensing becomes irrelevant). One practical example: forking linuxsampler: A lot of users are/were not happy with 32 channels LV2 output by default in Ardour (though this has meanwhile been solved in in Ardour with plugin pin connections). How could a user modify the source and redistribute the changes and make sure they're likewise not used in a commercial product? Would you oppose a non-free debian package alike the adobe-flash-installer? Basically a script that automatically get the source and compiles a local version or grabs a binary from some place? 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
