Hi All Hey I know this is a rather late comment - but I read everyone elses contribution and I feel I should add.
At this stage I am unaware of any precedent to this kind of claim. The claim against mp3/p2p software was an issue of music copyright and the illegal distribution of it - however no one ever sued anyone for making a recordable tape deck or video player. There has been no claim against any company or author with regards to hardware damage and due to the complexity judges dare not rule a software company responsible for financial damages caused by a bug. As for illegal use of a software well the crackers of win software have already solved that one. You have a better argument writing audio software it's intended use is legal and is easily defendable as such. It is a shame that the level of corporate bullying is more extreme in the U.S. than it is in many other places. ALthough the concept of Bush outlawing open source or GPL'd code is completely ridiculous - how could it be justified, enforced, or paid for .... The concept would be too outlaw something in the US that isn't elsewhere - many governments benefit from open source software so I can't see a unified international movement on this one. I also believe that the win and mac based "professional" audio softwares all have the same type of warranty free agreement even though some issue licenses to hardware companies or even produce their own. The production of hardware and softare could cease altogether if a succesful claim were made on these grounds and I can't see it happening. When it comes to IP then you should also be pretty safe Gates helped us here when he convinced early judges (sorry I don't have the dates) that while the appearance of his OS was similar to Steve Jobs' the functionality was completely different . ALso why wouldn't any of the sequencer/hd recorder big boys already have tried it against the little newcomers (some of which are getting quite big) The only issue I can see is AC3 coders/decoders ..... Hopefully mp3 has proved over wma that having an openly available format is more economically succesfull than a closed one...... I'm more concerned that the big boys involved with mLan see likewise and make it available to all. As for point to point and copyright of music issues that's really a completely different kettle of fish. My personal idea is that musicians/ copyright owners should be able to issue a "free-usage and not for profit distribution" license on the music they choose (similar to gpl i.e. sample and reuse this as well just send me a copy of your track/version) thereby still reserving the right to make an income out of music they wish to sell on cd or vinyl format.. While a low blow the RIAA were within their rights to stop what is illegal distribution of copyrighted music - by law..... If you want to change that vote for a governement that will. Whether going after the coders themselves was either just or ethical I have other opinions unless they were the people involved in the corporate structure of that particular company that WAS making a profit from the free distribution of copyrighted music. (think advertising space) Sure major artists may not be able to issue "free music" due to restrictive recording contracts but independant musicians and labels can do this maybe this is one way we can tip the balance here. However that is really a digression from the main point of this thread. Which is Broadcast2000 ........ if people have the GPL sources and wish to continue , please do - unless people can "revoke" GPL licenses although I can't see that in the terms. (and a personal request to make it truly viable for both audio and video put SMPTE/MMC sync functionality on to it... so it can lock to external video and audio devices correctly - I know Paul - wordclock would be paramount too) MOre to the point - don't let this stop any of you from your work - this is exactly what the corporates would hope for that the envionment is scaring the little guys (especially the ones who don't charge anything) out of the playing field ... leaving us with old and outdated ideas for software being developed by sluggish corporate structures....... remember you have the ability to write code - it is your right and privilidge to decide what you do with your IP.... the more that is released as GPL the less possible it is to seize it for profit as it becomes a more accepted way of computing. Anyway, don't panic about the world , and keep writing your fabulous magic. Remember as far as hd recorders to compare with the commercials we still have some excellent stuff on its way (Ardour , Mustajuuri and in a way MusE). Maybe it will come to the point where one needs to become a "member" of a non-profit organistation to even use software so that agreements concerning no warranty can be held down harder..... I hope not . Keep SMiling Allan Klinbail If? Records Melbourne Australia On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:31, Paul Davis wrote: > >Well, that's really sad. Let's hope that some people may go on with the > >previous GPL code... > > it also strikes me as mostly bullshit, though i'd want to speak to a > lawyer before concluding that completely. GPL'ed software is almost > universally made available with no warranty. as a post on slashdot > points out, Microsoft could be sued up the wazoo if it weren't for its > "no warranty" clause, and it never has been. why broadcast2000 would > be any different, given its similarly worded no-warranty clause, i > don't know. the key question for a lawyer would be how much it would > cost to establish the validity of the no-warranty clause. > > as for fears about IP infringement, thats a different story > altogether, and a lot more justified in the current climate. i just > hope that i can take on any such challenge if it comes toward ardour > ... i intend to try. > > --p
