<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi,<br>
the personn concern by this didn't really give his opinion, or maybe I
am wrong he already done in a previous thread that talked about this
problem.<br>
we all agree that all versions realized since now are under GPL's
licence terms and that won't change! But I didn't understand what will
happen for next, it seems some people here are more informed than
others?<br>
Is this double licence will affect the copy of the software, to change
the code, redistribute it... will be people have to use the both same
licence GPL and SIBSD(?), why did you talked, Mathieu, in the term
"non-free software, and at worst, it's illegal to distribute it"? We
need to know if this is serious or non-sense? Because it could change
the way we work with this piece of software... I think that's a subject
that concern every users here to know what's happen with PD and
librairies, because PIDIP is a group of externals, it's not PD
itself... it's like the story with Olaf and his ogg objects, his
position was clear... what about this time? Why Yves choose 2 licence,
why GPL is not anymore suited to his work?<br>
<br>
<br>
cheers<br>
<br>
juto<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="midPine.LNX.4.58.0601161325220.29305@web.artengine.ca"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Please note that PiDiP is legally muddy. At best, it's non-free software,
and at worst, it's illegal to distribute it.
This is because it has two licences and no mention that the user can pick
either, so by default all licenses must apply at once, and because those
two licenses are conflicting. It's licensed under both the GPL and a
modified SIBSD license. Normally, GPL and SIBSD are compatible, but the
extra PiDiP-specific clause is conflicting with the GPL.
The PiDiP-specific clause is also conflicting with the FSD (Free Software
Definition) and the OSD (Open-Source Definition): this is what is
prompting Hans to remove PiDiP from the pd-extended installers.
For more information you may read the pd-dev archives starting December
30th, 2005.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>