Re: Bug#819332: License question about sf2 soundfont in Tuxguitar

2023-01-16 Thread tony mancill
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 08:33:07AM -0800, tony mancill wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 10:02:55PM +0100, Helmar Gerloni wrote: > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2023/01/msg5.html > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2023/01/msg00097.html > > Roberto, Tobias, thanks for your

Re: Bug#819332: License question about sf2 soundfont in Tuxguitar

2023-01-16 Thread tony mancill
On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 10:02:55PM +0100, Helmar Gerloni wrote: > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2023/01/msg5.html > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2023/01/msg00097.html > Roberto, Tobias, thanks for your answers. > > I have removed MagicSFver2.sf2 from the package and

Re: License question about sf2 soundfont in Tuxguitar

2023-01-15 Thread Helmar Gerloni
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2023/01/msg5.html > https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2023/01/msg00097.html Roberto, Tobias, thanks for your answers. I have removed MagicSFver2.sf2 from the package and added a note to README.Debian. The new package now depends on

Re: License question about sf2 soundfont in Tuxguitar

2023-01-14 Thread Roberto
>From my personal experience of 15+ years contacting with authors of thousands of "free" sound fonts: they are usually composed of sounds taken from random places, and nobody really knows who made them or what their license are. Many of them take samples from other "free" sound fonts, and chain

License question about sf2 soundfont in Tuxguitar

2023-01-14 Thread Helmar Gerloni
Hello legal team, I am trying to update the Tuxguitar package from version 1.2 to 1.5.6. The new version includes the soundfont "Magic Sound Font v2.0". While Tuxguitar is licensed under LGPL-2.1+, the license of the soundfont file (MagicSFver2.sf2) is not 100% clear. The issue was discussed