[OT] The GPL and possible violations

[Ian Malone]

On 2/20/06, Temlakos <temlakos at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> But you may not /distribute/ a GPL/non-GPL package.
>

I presume you mean something derived from both.  True, unless
the licenses are compatible (eg LGPL can become GPL, I think BSD
can become GPL but I'd have to check).

> This is why Fedora /never/ distributes with MP3 libraries or
> applications. You have to get them separately from another repository,
> if you want to play something in that format. And I assume that most
> people here would advise you never to /rip/ to MP3, but rather stick to
> Ogg-Vorbis or other GPL sound format.
>

In fact lame is LGPL; the mp3 thing is a patent issue, which is a completely
different kettle of fish.  Ogg/Vorbis is not a "GPL" format" (actually the
reference implementation is mostly BSD licensed), it is an "unecumbered"
format, which means there are no patents covering it and you are free to
create your own implentation based on the spec using whatever licence
you wish.

--
imalone