Steve Harris hat gesagt: // Steve Harris wrote:
> Consensus seems to be that they need to distribute code for the
Are they? See below.
> However, shipping them in one
According to the slightly skewed view of the FSF, even the former could be a
If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to
each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program,
which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the
plug-ins. This means that combination of the GPL-covered plug-in with the
non-free main program would violate the GPL. However, you can resolve that
legal problem by adding an exception to your plug-in's license, giving
permission to link it with the non-free main program.
Quotint the GPL-FAQ. However applied to LADSPA this would mean, that
GPL-plug-ins are not allowed in commercial software *at all*, and this would
also be the case for e.g. Renoise, even when it doesn't ship the plugins, but
uses the system-wide installed plugins.
So if Beat Kangzs isn't allowed to load swh-plugins, then Renoise wouldn't be
allowed neither, as far as I understand it. And Renoise does load them, I just
checked. So we'd have another violation alert for Renoise. Happy hunting. :)
Linux-audio-dev mailing list