I'm not aware of that. Perhaps you're thinking about how pidip should all be GPL, since it is based on GPL code. The GPL does not allow more license restrictions, and the pidip license does just that. So that means that the GPL code included in pidip is still GPL, but the code that sevy contributed is under his license, and those two licenses conflict. So basically, pidip is not legal to distribute in binary form because of the conflicting licenses within itself.
Whether you choose to ignore copyright law is your decision. I am personally fine with people distributing pidip as its own thing and using it with any of my code as long as:
- the pidip distro is clearly marked as non-free
- pidip is not bundled with my GPLed code (i.e. as part of pd-extended,
pd-l2ork, etc.)
.hc
On 02/06/2013 11:44 AM, John Harrison wrote:
I thought there was an earlier version of PiDiP which was and could be included with Pd-extended because it was released under an acceptable/compatible license?
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.atwrote:
Just be aware that pidip is not free software because it has clauses in its license that restrict what it can be used for. Including pidip in your package means your package can no longer be legally distributed as binaries since the pidip license terms conflict with the GPL license terms.
.hc
On 02/06/2013 09:27 AM, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
I just finished cleaning up both pdp and pidip libs to be fully
auto-buildable
as part of pd-l2ork (including freenect, artoolkit, opencv, etc.). There
are a
number of packages you need to install from launchpad in order to get
all the
externals to build. Stay tuned for the next release coming soon with
these
enhancements...
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list