Awesome, haven't seen this on the pd list, so I'm replying here on the list as well.
Or maybe this has been posted here and I missed it.
One way or another: The [expr] family of object is now (finally) on BSD licensing!
Hurray!
2015-11-12 15:30 GMT-02:00 Shahrokh Yadegari sdy@ucsd.edu:
Hi Alexandre,
*You must have seen my other message. Expr is now on BSD licensing so all is solved.*
I doubt if anybody is using jmax but since IRCAM owned the code I developed while I was there, we have to go by that original licensing.
best, Shahroh
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com wrote:
Had to google to see why the relation to ircam, I understand now this was written as part of JMax, which has the GNU’s Lesser General Public License.
cool
I wonder if anyone still uses Jmax :)
I really think Ircam shouldn't mind this at all, and it'd be great to see this issue finally over with
again, is there anyone still using jmax?
cheers
2015-11-09 4:33 GMT-02:00 Shahrokh Yadegari sdy@ucsd.edu:
I am happy to distribute expr/expr~/fexpr~ objects on BSD license. The original expr code that I wrote at IRCAM, was made available as GLP by IRCAM, and later they were kind enough to change that to LGPL. They may be fine with BSD as well. I will ask and find out.
best, Shahrokh
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres < porres@gmail.com> wrote:
Shahrokh is working on a new release of the expr family of objects (0.5)
I'm copying him here, and I wouldn't know what his restrictions or issues would be regarding the license. Maybe if properly discussed with him, we could find a way to choose a license that is suitable for the libpd apps.
I agree that expr is essencial and such limitation would be bad for Pd apps.
cheers
2015-11-07 17:24 GMT-02:00 Scott R. Looney scottrlooney@gmail.com:
thanks Jonathan. this is what i assumed re LGPL when i saw a discussion about using fluidsynth in a build, which has a LGPL variant but not anything more permissive. so one question would be if anyone here on the list had a paid app rejected or accepted on the App Store due to using an LGPL license? expr and expr~ are very useful for a variety of things but for now i'm not using them due to this offchance.
i would further guess that FSF's exact words on LGPL were probably pretty dark on using the iTunes Store in general. i've seen some announcements from them in the past that made it clear how they feel about walled gardens.
best, scott
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list < pd-list@lists.iem.at> wrote:
> As of about 2 years ago, expr and relatives are LGPL and thus compatible with the App Store.
I emailed the Free Software Foundation, who are the publishers of the LGPL. They responded that the LGPL is not compatible with the restrictive terms of Apple's app store.
I forgot to ask them in advance if I could publicly post their response. If they say I can do so, I'll post their actual response. But it sounded pretty clear.
I suppose one could argue if it's a free app then who cares, and that the copyright holders of expr (or even Apple) are extremely unlikely to create a licensing fuss. But then that's the case whether expr is GPL, LGPL, or even "don't use this to murder people with drones" license.
If you want to write/use open source software that's compatible with Apple's app store, use the 3-clause BSD license.
-Jonathan
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Shahrokh Yadegari Professor of Composition and Sound Design, Theatre and Dance Department University of California, San Diego Director, Initiative for Digital Exploration of Arts and Science, (IDEAS) California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technologies (Calit2) Email: sdy@ucsd.edu Web: http://yadegari.org Tel: (858) 822-4113 Fax: (858) 534-1080
-- Shahrokh Yadegari Professor of Composition and Sound Design, Theatre and Dance Department University of California, San Diego Director, Initiative for Digital Exploration of Arts and Science, (IDEAS) California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technologies (Calit2) Email: sdy@ucsd.edu Web: http://yadegari.org Tel: (858) 822-4113 Fax: (858) 534-1080
If you _need_ expr to be 3-clause BSD for your particular use-case, I'd strongly suggest contacting an expert in licensing first. Document the entire process of license change that you can gather from this mailing list-- both the change to LGPL and the recent change to 3-clause BSD. Show them the relevant source code and revision history. If the expert then tells you everything looks legit, do be kind and report your findings back here on the list so others can benefit from them.
Some resources off the top of my head: SFLC (Software Freedom Law Center), FSF (Free Software Foundation). I suggest this because we've devoted our non-expert energy to licensing issues for expr once already, and it resulted in a license choice that wasn't even compatible with the proposed use-case.
-Jonathan
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:06 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com wrote:
Awesome, haven't seen this on the pd list, so I'm replying here on the list as well. Or maybe this has been posted here and I missed it. One way or another: The [expr] family of object is now (finally) on BSD licensing!
Hurray!
2015-11-12 15:30 GMT-02:00 Shahrokh Yadegari sdy@ucsd.edu:
Hi Alexandre, You must have seen my other message. Expr is now on BSD licensing so all is solved. I doubt if anybody is using jmax but since IRCAM owned the code I developed while I was there, we have to go by that original licensing. best,Shahroh
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com wrote:
Had to google to see why the relation to ircam, I understand now this was written as part of JMax, which has the GNU’s Lesser General Public License. cool I wonder if anyone still uses Jmax :) I really think Ircam shouldn't mind this at all, and it'd be great to see this issue finally over with again, is there anyone still using jmax? cheers 2015-11-09 4:33 GMT-02:00 Shahrokh Yadegari sdy@ucsd.edu:
I am happy to distribute expr/expr~/fexpr~ objects on BSD license. The original expr code that I wrote at IRCAM, was made available as GLP by IRCAM, and later they were kind enough to change that to LGPL. They may be fine with BSD as well. I will ask and find out. best,Shahrokh
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com wrote:
Shahrokh is working on a new release of the expr family of objects (0.5)
I'm copying him here, and I wouldn't know what his restrictions or issues would be regarding the license. Maybe if properly discussed with him, we could find a way to choose a license that is suitable for the libpd apps. I agree that expr is essencial and such limitation would be bad for Pd apps. cheers 2015-11-07 17:24 GMT-02:00 Scott R. Looney scottrlooney@gmail.com:
thanks Jonathan. this is what i assumed re LGPL when i saw a discussion about using fluidsynth in a build, which has a LGPL variant but not anything more permissive. so one question would be if anyone here on the list had a paid app rejected or accepted on the App Store due to using an LGPL license? expr and expr~ are very useful for a variety of things but for now i'm not using them due to this offchance.
i would further guess that FSF's exact words on LGPL were probably pretty dark on using the iTunes Store in general. i've seen some announcements from them in the past that made it clear how they feel about walled gardens.
best,scott On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list pd-list@lists.iem.at wrote:
As of about 2 years ago, expr and relatives are LGPL and thus compatible with the App Store.
I emailed the Free Software Foundation, who are the publishers of the LGPL. They responded that the LGPL is not compatible with the restrictive terms of Apple's app store. I forgot to ask them in advance if I could publicly post their response. If they say I can do so, I'll post their actual response. But it sounded pretty clear. I suppose one could argue if it's a free app then who cares, and that the copyright holders of expr (or even Apple) are extremely unlikely to create a licensing fuss. But then that's the case whether expr is GPL, LGPL, or even "don't use this to murder people with drones" license. If you want to write/use open source software that's compatible with Apple's app store, use the 3-clause BSD license. -Jonathan _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Alexandre Torres Porres -
Jonathan Wilkes