On 2017/11/27 15:25, RD <rdev...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Mr. Kellermann, > > I am contacting you in behave of audiokernel.org. (and page > euphony-audio.com) We offer MPD (Music Player Deamon) in our Euphony music > management software. > > I am sending you this mail, because our download provider CDN received a > request from email address "m...@duempel.org" with Max Kellermann reqesting > to remove image from their server, as we somehow violate GPL licensing > rules of MPD. > > We think we do not break any GPL rules, as we just offer installation > services and propriatary management software without any modifications to > orginal MPD code. > Also we clearly state licensing terms to end user, and communicate to all > users that he can download all playback components and use them without > Euphony management software to their best. > > Generally what we provide is a WEB based music library management system to > be used with few playback options which can be choosen via web interface > One of playback solutions is MPD. Other players include Roon, Squezebox and > Network audio player. > > Euphony music management system is not part of MPD, and it controls MPD > over MPD network interface, so we did not implement, nor changed any > additional code in MPD. Same situation is with other players we provide in > our Euphony image. > > Also we run Euphony on base of standard Arch Linux distribution, which is > enhanced scheduling system to better control which tasks have priority. > Both Arch Linux and extensions are not in anyway modified with us, we just > provide it to users, in code which can be found on official distribution > pages of Arch Linux. > > Our propriatary management system makes use of MPD and other playback > system very easy to use. Our service consists of propriatary software > (management system) and services which offers easy installation on > hardware. (software comes preinstalled on SSD disk). > > > We would be very happy if you can contact us via this email, so we can get > more understadning of this situation.
Hi Robert, thanks for replying. I tried to contact you via email more than a month ago (twice), but never got a reply. I guess my email never reached you (even though your mail server acknowledged receiving it), so let's restart this process now. This was my email: On 2017/10/25 08:33, Max Kellermann <m...@duempel.org> wrote: > I just downloaded from your website: > > http://euphonyimage-798b.kxcdn.com/euphony20171019.img.gz > SHA256 > d1b6d64887ad378e0bf7688d44b86159ccd4b3f34af1f4176e01c32166255a00 > > I hereby request the source code of all GPL and LGPL licensed > binaries contained therein. > > Your image does not contain an offer to provide the source code. > Please note that this is required according to the terms of the > GPLv2 section 3. > > Note that failure to provide the full source code constitutes a > copyright violation. Additionally, it will terminate your license > according to GPLv2 section 4, rendering your product illegal. And yes, you already did violate the GPL, as explained in my email. This formality isn't too important for me, it's just a good indicator that you didn't care about legal implications at all. Probably because you didn't know. However what is important for me is the rest of your GPL obligations. When you read up about your GPL obligations, don't overlook that commercial projects have stricter requirements than free distributions. Regards, Max Kellermann _______________________________________________ mpd-devel mailing list mpd-devel@musicpd.org http://mailman.blarg.de/listinfo/mpd-devel
