Hmm... Looking back in the git repo i saw:
commit 42f3e5f8dbc60ad644e9f8a1c5b61d1847e19470 Author: Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu Date: Thu Nov 3 11:40:35 2011 -0700
change expr~ source to LGPL license (with IRCAM"s permission :)
I had quite forgotten about this (and still can't remember this ever having happened) but here's the e-mail I got from Shahrokh:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 02:50:53AM -0700, Shahrokh Yadegari wrote:
Dear Max and Miller,
I got news from IRCAM that they are willing to release expr code on LGPL. Will that solve the current licensing problems?
Max, could you communicate to the list and let me know what they think
about
this. I hope this helps.
thanks, Shahrokh
So I think we're in the clear (although I hope Shahrokh kept the mail from IRCAM authorizing this!)
I'll go on and change the source over here so that it appears in the git repo. (This will take some time as I first want to merge my 0.45 fixes into 'master'.)
cheers Miller
On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 02:41:48PM +0900, i go bananas wrote:
just to clarify,
Shahrokh Yadegari, IRCAM, and the JMax developers, ALL agreed with the switch to LGPL license.
so AFAIK, the 'GPL' claim in the source code is still there simply because no-one has changed it.
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Dan Wilcox danomatika@gmail.com wrote:
Well, it seems like all the authors agree and there's already an LGPL license. I only brought up all of this due to the inconsistency between whats actually there in the source files. I'd love for that to just be changed and we all move on. It's not like this is a huge patent / money maker thing. If being anal and bringing this to light truly means I *can't* use it in the long run, well than I should have done what most everyone else does in these situations: use it and keep my mouth shut :P.
We know what is allowed / not allowed by Apple, don't need a lawyer for that.
On Oct 5, 2013, at 4:22 AM, pd-list-request@iem.at wrote:
On 10/04/2013 01:44 PM, Miller Puckette wrote:
One (not so minor) note on this... "expr" is copyright IRCAM (hahrokh Yadegari was working for IRCAM at the time) and is also included in Max, so it might be sbject to agreements between IRCAM and Cycling '74.
I was under the impression it was under GPL, not LGPL. I just looked and saw that, indeed, the LICENSE.txt file says LGPL and the expr source code print out "GPL" on startup. The reason I think it's actually GPL is that that is how IRCAM released it -- as part of jMAX, years ago. The current code is based on that original code. Although it was extensively reworked by Shahrokh, I presume the GPL terms under which he was working required him to release the result under GPL too.
So for the moment at least, I'm afraid FUD rules.
My vote would be to keep all the original GPL licenses in Pd vanilla's expr, and to remove the LGPL readme. GPL was the licensed under which expr was originally released, so we can reasonably assume all the copyright holders agreed to that license.
If the consensus was that it should be changed in order to accomodate Pure Data builds on IOS, then everyone who wants to use expr on IOS should pool their resources and hire a lawyer to explain what is and isn't allowed under the LGPL and Apple's TOS. The lawyer should also find out if it was indeed possible to change the license to LGPL in light of what Miller brings up about the original licensing.
That's two unknowns wrt LGPL expr, and they won't be solved by revising the source nor IANAL discussions.
Best, Jonathan
Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com
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