On Thursday 18 September 2008 03:11:14 Roberto Gordo Saez wrote: > I'm replying to myself for clarifying this: > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:57:52PM +0200, Roberto Gordo Saez wrote: > > Some licenses like the GPL requires the > > software to carry an appropriate copyright notice, and suggest to place > > a notice in every file. I'm not sure it is a legal requirement of the > > GPL to place a notice in every file [...] > > That paragraph is over-simplified, there are many other things to take > into account. First one and most important is that the author is not > bounded by the GPL terms, so the requirement to place notices in the > files when they are changed can only be really enforced for > contributors. Well..... but does the author remain THE author once there are other contributions in that file? > > I think it is always a good idea to place the license in every file, > though. > > You found that the commercial exception is not included in the notices > in source files (I never look into linuxsampler sources myself), and > I completely agree that it is confusing. They should have placed the > notice there as well. As you said, authors would not be happy if you > try to use this fact to fork it under pure GPL, their intentions are > clearly different, and I prefer to respect their opinion and either > accept or reject their conditions. Also, I personally think that it > would not be legal, but if you are willing to try the fork, go > for it :-) all the best, drew _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
