On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 01:14 +0100, Rui Nuno Capela wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Thursday 20 April 2006 11:03, Dave Phillips wrote: > >> Frank Barknecht wrote: > >>> According to their words: "COMMERCIAL USE of the souce code, > >>> libraries and applications is NOT ALLOWED without prior written > >>> permission by the LinuxSampler authors" no professional musician is > >>> allowed to use LinuxSampler except with a written permission. > >> Frank, where did you get this text ? It's not the text I quoted from > >> the LS README : > >> > >> "The LinuxSampler library (liblinuxsampler) and its applications are > >> distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (see > >> COPYING file), but with the EXCEPTION that they may NOT be used in > >> COMMERCIAL software or hardware products without prior written > >> authorization by the authors." > > > > Its my understanding of the GPL that you CANNOT apply additional > > restrictions and still call it "GPL". > > > > I'd suggest they consult with an attorney before they write such > > foolery. > > > >> This is from recent CVS sources. > > People, please calm down. > > I gotta repeat my own understanding of this issue, but I think it all > boils down to this: > > a) linuxsampler-0.3.3 is the last known public release; as is, its pure > GPL, everyone if free to fork it according to FSF legalese ;) This is not the first time I see something like this posted on the lists, sigh: -------- > tar xvjf /projects/planet/source/rpms/linuxsampler/linuxsampler-0.3.3.tar.bz2 > cd linuxsampler-0.3.3 > more README LinuxSampler - modular, streaming capable sampler by Benno Senoner (benno@xxxxxxxxxxx) and Christian Schoenebeck (cuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) This software is distributed under the GNU General Public License (see COPYING file), and may not be used in commercial applications without asking the authors for permission. -------- so, AFAIK 0.3.3 is already not really GPL for the reasons already listed in the thread. Maybe I have the wrong tarball? (BTW, try to download 0.3.3 - let me know how you manage to do that). If you go to the CVS site and browse the 0.3.3 release branch you get the same thing in the README. > b) linuxsampler CVS HEAD (IOW, all source code in CVS since 0.3.3 > release) is the one which The-Rather-Illegal-GPL-Exception applies; > thats actually intentional; if you're a distro packager, do NOT pick it! > being you debianese or not :) unless you get the explicit LS-devel > permission to do it, of course, as stated on the infamous exception. > > Is that clear? Not really, I keep seeing the above referenced README in 0.3.3. So, unless I'm missing something, please stop saying that this is only happening in CVS. -- Fernando
