Also: distribution with Quicktime support, FMOD, the art assets, the
fonts. (I believe I know the correct answer to the latter two - but we
may as well get it all clarified in one go, right?)
Have we missed any pieces?
Boy Lane wrote:
Hi Jason,
Agreed. But the question was not directly linked to GPL and the status of
the sources.
Let me summarize it again. One person creates a 3rd party viewer and
distributes KDU and Vivox components packaged with it. Claiming the earlier
here mentioned license terms would allow that.
However LL states that these components are not redistributable which seems
to be contrary to what those quoted license passages say.
So I'd ask again if someone from LL who are licensee of KDU and Vivox could
clarify if it is legally possible to package these components with a custom
built viewer or not.
Boy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Giglio"<[email protected]>
To: "Boy Lane"<[email protected]>
Cc:<[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: [sldev] Vivox and Kakadu licensing issues.
Boy Lane wrote:
Hi Gigs/Jason :)
This doesn't really make sense as both are dynamically linked and not
required to run the client.
Dynamically linking a closed source library isn't a pass for violating
the GPL.
Regarding that copyright notice you posted, Vivox itself uses a bunch of
open source software... The Vivox client is in large part just BSD
licensed code that has been closed.
-Jason
_______________________________________________
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
--
Tateru Nino
http://www.massively.com/
_______________________________________________
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
