IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Plugin foo_dsp_src violates copyright
m3ga
post Aug 9 2005, 11:16
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 9-August 05
Member No.: 23796



Dear Sir/Madam,

I am the author and copyright owner of software known as "Secret Rabbit Code" which is released
under the terms of the GNU General Public License.

On Monday August 8th 2005, I was made aware of a web site:

http://pelit.koillismaa.fi/plugins/dsp.php

which contains a php redirect link

http://pelit.koillismaa.fi/plugins/redir.php?id=494

which redirects to :

http://sbougribate.free.fr/Files/Foobar2000/foo_dsp_src.zip

which offers a binary derived from Secret Rabbit Code in direct violation of the GNU GPL [0].

I would like the people responsible for the above websites to do the following:

Free.fr (sbougribate.free.fr / Proxad.net):
Please remove the offending binary immediately. If the person who posted the binary
wishes to comply with the GNU GPL they can contact me at the email address listed
on the Secret Rabbit Code web page.

koillismaa.fi:
Please get the owner of the page:
http://pelit.koillismaa.fi/plugins/dsp.php
to remove the link to the binary as soons as possible and replace it with a statement that
the link was removed because of copyright violation.

I look forward to your swift reponse to this copyright violation.

Regards,
Erik
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Gabriel
post Aug 9 2005, 13:21
Post #2


LAME developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 2950
Joined: 1-October 01
From: Nanterre, France
Member No.: 138



QUOTE
GPL cannot be linked to closed source code. Is Foobar2000 released under a GPL
compatible license?

I did not thought about that point.
In case of application plug-ins, I am not sure if this apply. The plug-in itself abviously falls under the GPL, but I am not sure about the application dynamically loading it. Is there a definitive and comprehensive answer about that?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PoisonDan
post Aug 9 2005, 13:40
Post #3





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 678
Joined: 10-December 01
From: Belgium
Member No.: 622



QUOTE (Gabriel @ Aug 9 2005, 02:21 PM)
QUOTE
GPL cannot be linked to closed source code. Is Foobar2000 released under a GPL
compatible license?

I did not thought about that point.
In case of application plug-ins, I am not sure if this apply. The plug-in itself abviously falls under the GPL, but I am not sure about the application dynamically loading it. Is there a definitive and comprehensive answer about that?
*


I don't know, but I remember that we discussed this point several times before on this board. Maybe this part about GPL-related disputes contains some relevant information.


--------------------
Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
m3ga
post Aug 9 2005, 14:40
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 9-August 05
Member No.: 23796



QUOTE (PoisonDan @ Aug 9 2005, 10:40 PM)
I don't know, but I remember that we discussed this point several times before on this board. Maybe this part about GPL-related disputes contains some relevant information.
*


The link does explicity states that this issue has not been tested in court smile.gif .

However, it does state that a number of companies release GPL licensed dynamic libraries
and have separate commercial licensing available for companies or individuals which want to
use the library but do not want to release their own source code.

Since a commercal use license is available for Secret Rabbit Code it should be pretty obvious
that I assert that dynamically linking to a GPL licensed library creates a derviative work of
of that library. I am in the process of updating the licensing web page:

http://www.mega-nerd.com/SRC/license.html

I will also be adding a notice to this effect under the GPL copyright notice.

In other news, KarlKox has contacted me and removed the binary from his web site. Thanks
Karl.

I am now looking into the possibility of making a Secret Rabbit Code based resampler available
for foobar2000 users while maitaining my ability to to dual license the code and earn an income
from it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rjamorim
post Aug 31 2005, 01:40
Post #5


Rarewares admin


Group: Members
Posts: 7515
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Brazil
Member No.: 81



QUOTE (m3ga @ Aug 9 2005, 10:40 AM)
I am now looking into the possibility of making a Secret Rabbit Code based resampler available for foobar2000 users
*


...or users could just use one of the several high-quality resamplers available for foobar developed by people that actually know how the GPL works and what are the limitations involved, hrmmmm?

Food for thought:
in_mad
in_mpp (back when Musepack decoder was GPLd)
SNESamp
bbMPEG.PRM
... and countless other plugins for Winamp/Foobar/Photoshop/Audition, not to mention VST plugins and DirectShow filters, based on GPLd code.


--------------------
Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kode54
post Aug 31 2005, 15:18
Post #6





Group: Admin
Posts: 4687
Joined: 15-December 02
Member No.: 4082



QUOTE (rjamorim @ Aug 30 2005, 05:40 PM)
in_mad
*

Modified libmad to support single-packet decoding, mailed a patch to the developers over a year ago, never got a response.

QUOTE
SNESamp
*

The applicable GPL code is a self-contained DLL module, but I'm not sure about the necessary plug-in. I also ported it to 0.9, and updated my dll_manager for full multi-instance, but that was only for benchmarking purposes.

QUOTE
... and countless other plugins for Winamp/Foobar/Photoshop/Audition, not to mention VST plugins and DirectShow filters, based on GPLd code.
*

And probably in most of those cases, the authors of the relevant GPL libraries or other projects were not trying to make money through dual licensing. The project I can think of where that was not the case was rOn's UADE component for Winamp3, and I already know very little of the history surrounding that debacle.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- m3ga   Plugin foo_dsp_src violates copyright   Aug 9 2005, 11:16
- - Gabriel   Have you contacted the plugin author about source ...   Aug 9 2005, 11:54
|- - m3ga   QUOTE (Gabriel @ Aug 9 2005, 08:54 PM)Have yo...   Aug 9 2005, 12:29
- - Gabriel   QUOTE GPL cannot be linked to closed source code. ...   Aug 9 2005, 13:21
|- - PoisonDan   QUOTE (Gabriel @ Aug 9 2005, 02:21 PM)QUOTE G...   Aug 9 2005, 13:40
||- - m3ga   QUOTE (PoisonDan @ Aug 9 2005, 10:40 PM)I don...   Aug 9 2005, 14:40
||- - rjamorim   QUOTE (m3ga @ Aug 9 2005, 10:40 AM)I am now l...   Aug 31 2005, 01:40
|||- - kode54   QUOTE (rjamorim @ Aug 30 2005, 05:40 PM)in_ma...   Aug 31 2005, 15:18
||- - m3ga   QUOTE (m3ga @ Aug 9 2005, 23:40) I am now...   Jun 6 2006, 09:41
||- - OCedHrt   Couldn't we consider Foobar2000 to be the ...   Jun 6 2006, 10:04
||- - TrNSZ   Erik has been nice enough to provide his resampler...   Jun 6 2006, 13:53
|- - KarLKoX   QUOTE (Gabriel @ Aug 9 2005, 04:21 AM)QUOTE G...   Aug 9 2005, 14:19
- - rjamorim   Weeeee. Somebody didn't do his licensing homew...   Aug 31 2005, 01:14
- - PatchWorKs   From FSF's Frequently Asked Questions about th...   Oct 22 2005, 23:32
|- - rjamorim   QUOTE (PatchWorKs @ Oct 22 2005, 08:32 PM)Fro...   Oct 23 2005, 00:03
|- - m3ga   [quote=rjamorim,Oct 23 2005, 09:03 AM] > First...   Oct 23 2005, 09:05
|- - rjamorim   QUOTE (m3ga @ Oct 23 2005, 06:05 AM)> Firs...   Oct 23 2005, 14:36
|- - m3ga   QUOTE (rjamorim @ Oct 23 2005, 11:36 PM)Calm ...   Oct 23 2005, 19:04
|- - rjamorim   QUOTE (m3ga @ Oct 23 2005, 04:04 PM)Noone can...   Oct 23 2005, 21:30
||- - Otto42   QUOTE (rjamorim @ Oct 23 2005, 03:30 PM)But I...   Oct 27 2005, 01:34
||- - rjamorim   QUOTE (Otto42 @ Oct 26 2005, 10:34 PM)> 3....   Oct 27 2005, 02:07
||- - iStormy   [removed]   Dec 12 2005, 08:49
|- - kode54   QUOTE (m3ga @ Oct 23 2005, 11:04 AM)Some time...   Oct 24 2005, 15:01
- - rjamorim   Now that I think about it, I should urge John33 to...   Oct 24 2005, 15:19
- - kjoonlee   Um, you're taking this too far. the GPL specif...   Oct 24 2005, 16:55
|- - rjamorim   QUOTE (kjoonlee @ Oct 24 2005, 01:55 PM)Um, y...   Oct 24 2005, 20:25
- - Lyx   I know that licences and laws aren't about it,...   Oct 24 2005, 21:00
- - kjoonlee   IANAL. rjamorim, aren't you verging way off-...   Oct 24 2005, 21:01
- - rjamorim   QUOTE (Lyx @ Oct 24 2005, 06:00 PM)But concer...   Oct 24 2005, 22:16
- - Kadavro   We're about to have a brand new law here on ne...   Dec 12 2005, 06:47
|- - Lyx   QUOTE (Kadavro @ Dec 12 2005, 06:47 AM)We...   Dec 12 2005, 12:57
||- - anza   QUOTE (Lyx @ Dec 12 2005, 01:57 PM)ROFLMAO - ...   Dec 12 2005, 13:47
|||- - Lyx   QUOTE (anza @ Dec 12 2005, 01:47 PM)You can p...   Dec 12 2005, 14:20
||- - Kadavro   QUOTE (Lyx @ Dec 12 2005, 01:57 PM)ROFLMAO - ...   Dec 13 2005, 15:39
|- - ssamadhi97   QUOTE (Kadavro @ Dec 12 2005, 06:47 AM)Since ...   Dec 13 2005, 23:15
- - Sandman2012   I was never interested in this plugin until there ...   Dec 13 2005, 00:00
- - klez   QUOTE It would make sense to be respectful of the ...   Jun 7 2006, 13:28
|- - saivert   The GPL license was made to protect free and open ...   Aug 6 2006, 12:21
- - Enig123   Sorry to take this old thread up. I'm wonderin...   Sep 18 2008, 15:34
- - Yirkha   $ure.   Sep 18 2008, 15:56


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th December 2014 - 05:05