On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:45:11PM +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:10:00AM -1000, Joel Roth wrote: > > > I understand that the formal way of going about that to > > avoid copyright issues is the 'clean room' approach in which > > one person (or group) reads the code and communicates to the > > other who writes the equivalent functioning new code. > > Studying the way some software emulates a system does not > necessarily provide correct information on what is being > emulated, unless it is a complete and accurate physical > model, which is unlikely. > > You may be able to find out some interesting parameter > values but there it ends. > > For example the way Aeolus generates an organ pipe sound > (additive synthesis and some postprocessing) has no > relation at all to what happens in a real organ pipe > (which is a complex non-linear and sometimes partially > chaotic combination of an oscillatir and filter that > are tightly coupled and influence each other). > > As an author of such software you make choices on how > to do certain things, for all sort of reasons ranging > from conceptual to very pragmatic. The latter may > obfuscate things considerably, and provide the author's > signature in a sense. > > If someone would write an organ synth by re-implementing > the processing in Aeolus in entirely new code I would > probably have no problem in detecting that quite soon, > given the new code. > > Ciao, What you say is true. The point I am making is that the "new" code would not be under the copyright of your existing code. -- Joel Roth _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
