Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Javier Serrano Polo]

El dl 10 de 04 de 2017 a les 23:06 +0200, Peter Hanappe va escriure:
> However, it seems that chorus.c is now under the LGPL license. From
> https://sourceforge.net/p/sox/code/ci/master/tree/COPYING:

As I understand, fluidsynth_chorus.c was imported from SoX rather than
the original project by Juergen Mueller. Thus, Chris Bagwell is the one
who can shed light on the origin.

> However, since fluidsynth was under LGPL
> with "Copyright (C) 2003 Peter Hanappe and others" from the
> beginning, I don't believe any contributors to
> fluidsynth_chorus.c would object to putting their changes to that
> file under the LGPL. I'll happily make my changes available under
> that license.

That makes sense. However, the main problem is the permission from
Juergen Mueller and related contributors.

> So, because SoX/chorus.c is now under the LGPL and all the
> changes that have been made between chorus.c and
> fluidsynth_chorus.c fall under the LGPL, I believe that
> fluidsynth_chorus.c can be put under the LGPL, too.

I see no evidence to support such relicensing. Original copyright should
be to dropped if there is no trace from the original file, but this does
not seem to be the case.


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Peter Hanappe]

Hello all,

I agree that the licenses in fluidsynth are not completely consisted and
Debian is right to make sure that they are.
However, it seems that chorus.c is now under the LGPL license. From
https://sourceforge.net/p/sox/code/ci/master/tree/COPYING:

  SoX source code is distributed under two main licenses. The two
  licenses are in the files LICENSE.GPL and LICENSE.LGPL. sox.c,
  and thus SoX-the user application, is distributed under the
  GPL, while the files that make up libsox are licensed under the
  less restrictive LGPL.

In the Makefile.am, you can see that chorus.c is part of libsox
(https://sourceforge.net/p/sox/code/ci/master/tree/src/Makefile.am).

I don't check the list of contributors to
fluidsynth_chorus.c. There was Markus Nentwig and me but surely
others, too. However, since fluidsynth was under LGPL
with "Copyright (C) 2003 Peter Hanappe and others" from the
beginning, I don't believe any contributors to
fluidsynth_chorus.c would object to putting their changes to that
file under the LGPL. I'll happily make my changes available under
that license.

So, because SoX/chorus.c is now under the LGPL and all the
changes that have been made between chorus.c and
fluidsynth_chorus.c fall under the LGPL, I believe that
fluidsynth_chorus.c can be put under the LGPL, too.

Cheers,
Peter



On 04/10/2017 12:38 PM, Javier Serrano Polo wrote:

El dl 10 de 04 de 2017 a les 09:24 +0200, David Henningsson va escriure:

What makes things slightly easier for us as upstream is that FluidSynth
is released under LGPL rather than GPL. LGPL allows linking to custom
licenses.

This is not the case because fluid_chorus.c is part of the library and
must respect rights under LGPL.

Rewriting fluid_chorus.c could be one first step. However, we could wait
some time until Chris Bagwell tells us about the original source; Chris
Bagwell or Peter Hanappe, it is not clear to me that fluid_chorus.c
comes from SoX.


___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Javier Serrano Polo]

El dl 10 de 04 de 2017 a les 09:24 +0200, David Henningsson va escriure:
> What makes things slightly easier for us as upstream is that FluidSynth 
> is released under LGPL rather than GPL. LGPL allows linking to custom 
> licenses.

This is not the case because fluid_chorus.c is part of the library and
must respect rights under LGPL.

Rewriting fluid_chorus.c could be one first step. However, we could wait
some time until Chris Bagwell tells us about the original source; Chris
Bagwell or Peter Hanappe, it is not clear to me that fluid_chorus.c
comes from SoX.


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[David Henningsson]

Hi.

This came as a surprise for me. What's worse, it seems like none of the 
maintainers are currently active in Fluidsynth, and AFAIK none of us 
have time to either rewrite fluid_chorus.c, or track down all 
contributors to it since 1998.


What makes things slightly easier for us as upstream is that FluidSynth 
is released under LGPL rather than GPL. LGPL allows linking to custom 
licenses.


Thus, my suggestion for us as upstream is that we clearly document (in 
readme files etc) that we have one file that is not LGPL. That I can do.


Perhaps Debian has the time/manpower required to track down 
contributors? FWIW,


In the event that I should hold any copyright in fluid_chorus.c, I'm 
happy to allow these to be relicensed under GNU

LGPL 2.0+.

Regards,
  David Henningsson

On 2017-04-07 20:01, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:



2017-04-07 14:16 GMT+02:00 Javier Serrano Polo >:


Source: fluidsynth
Version: 1.1.6-4
Severity: wishlist

fluid_chorus.c is under a custom license, granting the following:

This source code is freely redistributable and may be used for
any purpose.


Hi fluidsynth devs,

we serious licensing issue in debian in fluid_chorus.c file.
Is there any chance to relicense this file with some GPL friendly license?
Full bug report here:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=859793

best regards

mira



___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Javier Serrano Polo]

Dear Chris Bagwell,

In 1999, you imported src/chorus.c to SoX on SourceForge.[6] File is
copyrighted by Juergen Mueller and sundry contributors. Could you tell
us where we could find the original project or how to contact Juergen
Mueller?

Thank you.

--
[6] 
https://sourceforge.net/p/sox/code/ci/98267de439714fcdff94c9588f34fb8a67df70c1/?page=1


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Fabian Greffrath]

Am Freitag, den 07.04.2017, 14:16 +0200 schrieb Javier Serrano Polo:
> This source code is freely redistributable and may be used for
> any purpose.
> 
> The license does not grant the right to modify the software. Therefore,
> it is not compatible with GPL-2.1+ (sic) or LGPL-2.0+.

Well, it could be argued that software modification is a purpose in
itself, but I agree that the wording is unfortunate/ambigious.

 - Fabian


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Javier Serrano Polo]

Regarding SoX and Debian bug #92969, the copyright handling in wav.c is
dubious.[5] Assuming this modification is allowed, wav.c changes the
notice

XAnim Copyright (C) 1990-1997 by Mark Podlipec.
[...]
This software may be freely copied, modified and redistributed
without fee for non-commerical purposes

which is clearly incompatible with the original license, to

Thanks goes to Mark Podlipec's XAnim code.  It gave some real
life understanding of how the ADPCM format is processed.  Actual
code was implemented based off of various sources from the net.

So the code was from Mark Podlipec, but now it is only an inspiration
for Chris Bagwell, yet various sources from the net are needed? Or Mark
Podlipec's code was inspired by those sources from the net? Chris
Bagwell should clarify the origin of the code.

--
[5] 
https://sourceforge.net/p/sox/code/ci/613f50d018d73308428dda8c610066a726e1a95e/


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Javier Serrano Polo]

El dv 07 de 04 de 2017 a les 19:13 +0100, James Cowgill va escriure:
> FYI the license in question is the SoX license which has been in Debian
> and basically all distributions for 20 years (as part of SoX)...

So SoX and derivatives are affected too. The problem was not
detected.[3]

> The SoX project relicensed some time ago to GPL so if you are to believe
> that that was OK, then there are no licensing problems with this file
> (but the copyright header should be updated to reflect that).

Upstream file still has the old copyright.[4] Where is this relicensing
process documented?

--
[3] https://bugs.debian.org/92969
[4] https://sourceforge.net/p/sox/code/ci/master/tree/src/chorus.c


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[James Cowgill]

Hi,

On 07/04/17 19:01, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:
> 2017-04-07 14:16 GMT+02:00 Javier Serrano Polo  >:
> 
> Source: fluidsynth
> Version: 1.1.6-4
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> fluid_chorus.c is under a custom license, granting the following:
> 
> This source code is freely redistributable and may be used for
> any purpose.
> 
> 
> Hi fluidsynth devs,
> 
> we serious licensing issue in debian in fluid_chorus.c file.
> Is there any chance to relicense this file with some GPL friendly license?
> Full bug report here:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=859793

FYI the license in question is the SoX license which has been in Debian
and basically all distributions for 20 years (as part of SoX)...

I assume the file is based on this:
https://sources.debian.net/src/sox/14.4.1-5/src/chorus.c/

The SoX project relicensed some time ago to GPL so if you are to believe
that that was OK, then there are no licensing problems with this file
(but the copyright header should be updated to reflect that).

James



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Jaromír Mikeš]

2017-04-07 14:16 GMT+02:00 Javier Serrano Polo :

> Source: fluidsynth
> Version: 1.1.6-4
> Severity: wishlist
>
> fluid_chorus.c is under a custom license, granting the following:
>
> This source code is freely redistributable and may be used for
> any purpose.
>

Hi fluidsynth devs,

we serious licensing issue in debian in fluid_chorus.c file.
Is there any chance to relicense this file with some GPL friendly license?
Full bug report here:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=859793

best regards

mira
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#859793: fluidsynth: Package has infringed GPL

[Javier Serrano Polo]

Source: fluidsynth
Version: 1.1.6-4
Severity: wishlist

fluid_chorus.c is under a custom license, granting the following:

This source code is freely redistributable and may be used for
any purpose.

The license does not grant the right to modify the software. Therefore,
it is not compatible with GPL-2.1+ (sic) or LGPL-2.0+.

Whether intentionally or not, Debian has been distributing this software
without complying with GPL. Thus its rights have been automatically
terminated. Ceasing violation does not restore rights and a new license
should be acquired.

I will remind you of the scope of such infringement. Since Debian does
not have the right to distribute, it does not have the right to
propagate the license. All Debian-based distros and their users have not
automatically received a license through Debian.

Because of the avalanche effect of GPL, all works based on these
versions of FluidSynth have not received rights under GPL. The process
recurs: all Debian-based distros, their users, and depending works have
not received a license through this path.

I will remind you of the potential severity. Like the patent troll
phenomenon, some people profit from GPL reinstatements. The argument
exists:

If you have redistributed an application under GPLv2, but have
violated the terms of GPLv2, you must request a reinstatement of
rights from the copyright holders before making further
distributions, or else cease distribution and modification of
the software forever.[1]

There are real cases based on this reasoning; e.g., BusyBox related.[2]
Although the Software Freedom Law Center may not be interested in
infringements caused because of FluidSynth, other parties may be. Is
there anyone against successful free audio software?

--
[1] https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-guide.html
[2] http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/73241.html


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers