En/na Free Ekanayaka ha escrit: > Hi Javier, > > sorry for the delay, but I was on holiday and I'm still recovering the > old mails..
Oh my, you don't need to apologize. > JSP> Oh, that reminds me. Free Ekanayaka, did you get explicit permission > JSP> from Torben Hohn? You know that Steinberg headers aren't like a Java > JSP> compiler, don't you? GPL still applies. > > I've downloaded the VST development kit from the Steinberg site, and > accepted the use conditions. Then I've built the fst package (as you > would compile any other VST plugin using the Steinberg development > kit) and uploaded it to non-free. From my understanding this is > perfectly legal, as is legal to distribute VST plugins compiled with > the VST SDK. Read the first paragraphs in Paul Davis' message at http://lalists.stanford.edu/lad/2006/06/0223.html It's pretty clear. Steinberg's license allows you to do that. GPL doesn't. > JSP> Oh no, it's depending on LASH. I'm afraid you didn't get it. I read > JSP> through their mail archives (fst archives), Paul Davis (co-author) > JSP> argued LASH dependency was enough reason to not grant exceptions nor > JSP> allow binary distributions. > > Mmmh, I'm not sure to get this point, please would you elaborate? Ok, that comment was from Thomas Vecchione, not Paul Davis. If you follow that thread you'll find it. The matter is if Torben and Paul grant GPL exceptions then my program could distribute the binary VST plugin. This doesn't apply to current fst, because of the extra dependency on lash. Their authors would have to grant GPL exceptions too. > JSP> By the way, my program doesn't use LASH so that reason doesn't apply. > JSP> Got no answer from them. So, if you succeed in this point, please let me know :) Bye. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
