On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Gabriel M. Beddingfield<[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Chris Cannam wrote: >> >> If your interpretation was correct, then I could require Cubase to be >> GPL'd by writing a VST plugin for it and publishing it under the GPL. >> This would obviously be absurd. In real life, a court faced with a > > No, Steinburg wouldn't be held to the GPL... your user would.
My _user_? That can't be the case, the GPL only covers distribution. Nick's interpretation was "same memory space => derived work", implying that a host that loads a GPL'd plugin is a derived work of that plugin, ergo Cubase is a derived work of my VST plugin -- which is obviously absurd. Chris _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
