Res: License problem
|
|
Roberto José de Amorim
|
LAME's mpglib is actually a fork from mpg123, and back when it was forked,
its license was GPL. I suspect updating the code to the current version of mpglib would be a time-consuming effort, not really called for at this point. Regards; Roberto. ----- Mensagem original ---- De: Masoud Salahi <[hidden email]> Para: [hidden email] Enviadas: Segunda-feira, 19 de Maio de 2008 4:10:31 Assunto: License problem hi Mr Amorim as described in lame license file ( http://lame.sourceforge.net/license.txt ) "The decoding functions provided in LAME use the mpglib decoding engine which is under the GPL" but i contact mpg123 maintainer and he told me that currently whole mpg123 is under LGPL license! (but in past some parts where GPL) he also told me to ask you to update your decoding portion or at least the license. why you doesn't update the license file yet? you can contact mpg123 maintainer at : [hidden email] -- Best Regards Masoud ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Lame-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lame-dev |
||||||||||||||||
Alexander Leidinger
|
Quoting Roberto José de Amorim <[hidden email]> (from Mon, 19 May
2008 03:28:24 -0700 (PDT)): > LAME's mpglib is actually a fork from mpg123, and back when it was forked, > its license was GPL. I suspect updating the code to the current version > of mpglib would be a time-consuming effort, not really called for at this > point. In fact, the HIP part in CVS is a merge of the LAME mpglib part and the LGPLed mpglib part. The problem is that nobody took the time to integrate it into the main LAME branch. So if someone would take some time, check out the hip part in CVS, merge in the new things of the current mpglib code, and then integrate it into LAME, we could change the license. Bye, Alexander. > Regards; > > Roberto. > > ----- Mensagem original ---- > De: Masoud Salahi <[hidden email]> > Para: [hidden email] > Enviadas: Segunda-feira, 19 de Maio de 2008 4:10:31 > Assunto: License problem > > hi Mr Amorim > as described in lame license file ( http://lame.sourceforge.net/license.txt ) > "The decoding functions provided in LAME use the mpglib decoding > engine which is under the GPL" > but i contact mpg123 maintainer and he told me that currently whole > mpg123 is under LGPL license! (but in past some parts where GPL) > he also told me to ask you to update your decoding portion or at least > the license. > why you doesn't update the license file yet? > you can contact mpg123 maintainer at : > [hidden email] > -- > Best Regards > Masoud > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Lame-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lame-dev > > -- BOFH excuse #53: Little hamster in running wheel had coronary; waiting for replacement to be Fedexed from Wyoming http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Lame-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lame-dev |
Linda W-6
|
Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting Roberto José de Amorim <[hidden email]> (from Mon, 19 May > 2008 03:28:24 -0700 (PDT)): > >> LAME's mpglib is actually a fork from mpg123, and back when it was forked, >> its license was GPL. I suspect updating the code to the current version >> of mpglib would be a time-consuming effort, not really called for at this >> point. > > In fact, the HIP part in CVS is a merge of the LAME mpglib part and > the LGPLed mpglib part. The problem is that nobody took the time to > integrate it into the main LAME branch. So if someone would take some > time, check out the hip part in CVS, merge in the new things of the > current mpglib code, and then integrate it into LAME, we could change > the license. > Alexander. What the heck is the "hip" part in CVS? I doubt it means hip in the "hippie" sense of what is currently "fashionable", "cool" "hot" or is the current 'fad'...:-) Legal _musings_ (thoughts outloud) and meanderings follow... ignore if bored by such mindless mastications...:-) Isn't LPGL less restrictive than GPL? So if the only code holding you back from changing the license is the mpg123 code, and it has already been re-licensed, it *seems* (IANAL) the current mpg123 in LAME could be 'co-licensed' under LPGL without needing to move to the current mpg source base. That's presuming the mpg123 author wouldn't mind or care -- but since he's already changed licenses, I'm not sure why he would... If I understand, the LPGL license permits another program to link to "library" code without the calling program being 'tainted' by the GPL. Isn't it usually the case that programs don't actually link with LAME, but use the run-time loadable files (.so or .dll 'lib' files). If that's the case, I'd argue that no linking is occurring, so it doesn't matter if it is GPL or LPG -- unless you are referring to a requirement to distribute the source needed to build the stand-alone library of lame. HOWEVER, conceptually, the include or header files (.h) that are released by the LAME project that would enable one to easily access the "stand-alone" dynamically loadable LAME library functions would have to be LPGL to be 'included' in a compiled, proprietary program. But I'd strongly argue that using a memory resident program through "public" interfaces _shouldn't_ taint a calling program -- any more than calling a memory resident Operating System (Windows, BSD or Linux) would 'taint' user programs running on them. I'm sure that whatever is 'intended', you could find lawyers willing to argue either side, ethical or not, for the right price... ;^/ ... Would the point of changing the license on LAME be to allow proprietary programs to bind in a private (but unmodified) copy of the LAME library so as to not have to deal with installing a library file "somewhere" (in the same directory for .DLL files works, so not a big deal as far as I can tell). Or is the purpose to avoid having to make the source for LAME available somewhere? I _think_ it's considered acceptable to make the source available for download from a web site these days... Whatever is "so" (or true), though, I must admit, I'm only "thinking outloud" (discussing). As even if I was a lawyer, the law is really only what a 'party' is able to get a judge (or jury) to rule "in favor of" in a court of law -- everything else (truth, innocence, guilt or reality) is just legal theory (at least in the U.S....). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Lame-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lame-dev |
||||||||||||||||
|
Alexander Leidinger
|
Quoting Linda W <[hidden email]> (from Wed, 21 May 2008 21:56:02 -0700):
> > > Alexander Leidinger wrote: >> Quoting Roberto José de Amorim <[hidden email]> (from Mon, 19 >> May 2008 03:28:24 -0700 (PDT)): >> >>> LAME's mpglib is actually a fork from mpg123, and back when it was forked, >>> its license was GPL. I suspect updating the code to the current version >>> of mpglib would be a time-consuming effort, not really called for at this >>> point. >> >> In fact, the HIP part in CVS is a merge of the LAME mpglib part and >> the LGPLed mpglib part. The problem is that nobody took the time >> to integrate it into the main LAME branch. So if someone would >> take some time, check out the hip part in CVS, merge in the new >> things of the current mpglib code, and then integrate it into >> LAME, we could change the license. >> Alexander. > --- > What the heck is the "hip" part in CVS? I doubt it means > hip in the "hippie" sense of what is currently "fashionable", "cool" > "hot" or is the current 'fad'...:-) http://lame.cvs.sourceforge.net/lame/hip/ > Legal _musings_ (thoughts outloud) and meanderings follow... > ignore if bored by such mindless mastications...:-) > > Isn't LPGL less restrictive than GPL? So if the only code Yes. > holding you back from changing the license is the mpg123 code, and it > has already been re-licensed, it *seems* (IANAL) the current mpg123 in > LAME could be 'co-licensed' under LPGL without needing to move to the > current mpg source base. That's presuming the mpg123 author wouldn't > mind or care -- but since he's already changed licenses, I'm not sure > why he would... Strictly speaking (IANAL), there's more than one author of mpg123. Just because it means that Vx is LGPLed doesn't mean we can LGPL Vy (y<x) too. There may be code in y which is not in x anymore. For this part of the code there may be no agreement to relicense. > If I understand, the LPGL license permits another program > to link to "library" code without the calling program being > 'tainted' by the GPL. Isn't it usually the case that programs don't > actually link with LAME, but use the run-time loadable files (.so > or .dll 'lib' files). If that's the case, I'd argue that no linking > is occurring, so it doesn't matter if it is GPL or LPG -- unless you > are referring to a requirement to distribute the source needed to > build the stand-alone library of lame. The lib contains the mpg123 code (except you specify to exclude it). > HOWEVER, conceptually, the include or header files (.h) that > are released by the LAME project that would enable one to easily > access the "stand-alone" dynamically loadable LAME library functions > would have to be LPGL to be 'included' in a compiled, proprietary > program. But I'd strongly argue that using a memory resident program > through "public" interfaces _shouldn't_ taint a calling program -- > any more than calling a memory resident Operating System (Windows, BSD or > Linux) would 'taint' user programs running on them. This was argued about a lot. I don't want to repeat such a discussion here. The L in LGPL was "Libary" before, now it is "Lesser". Not because it makes no sense for a library, but because the LGPL where used by programs too, not only libs. So basically it comes down to: if you use a lib you create derived work, so it would fall within the GPL. If someone uses the executable, he can provide the source of lame within the program somewhere (CD/download/...) and that's all, but if he uses the lib, he has to remove the decoding part from lame (and provide the source of lame), or he risks that his program _can_ be attacked as not being licensed within the GPL (I doubt the people which wrote mpglib would sue, as they relicensed it, but that's another point). In my opinion (risk management) it's safe to use the decoding part when you comply to the LGPL, but there's no guarantee (and this is the part where lawyers come into the game). By incorporating HIP, we would have a guarantee. Bye, Alexander. -- PUNK ROCK!! DISCO DUCK!! BIRTH CONTROL!! http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Lame-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lame-dev |
||||||||||||||||
| Free Embeddable Forum Powered by Nabble | Help |
