RPC code relicensed (was: Bug#181493: SUN RPC code is DFSG-free)

2010-08-27 Thread Josue Abarca
RPC code was relicensed to 3-clause BSD license. The glib commit: http://sources.redhat.com/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=a7ab6ec83e144dafdc7c46b8943288f450f8e320 From: http://spot.livejournal.com/315383.html Quote: "... So, we restarted the effort with Oracle, and on August 18, 2010, Wim Coekaer

Re: [Lame-dev] LAME license

2010-08-27 Thread Francesco Poli
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 23:27:36 +0200 Gabriel Bouvigne wrote: > Reinhard Tartler a écrit : [...] > > Now the member of the ftpteam is concerned that this might be an > > additional restriction that is not allowed by the (L)GPLv2. > > LGPLv2 doesn't allow any licensee to set additionnal restriction

Re: [Lame-dev] LAME license

2010-08-27 Thread Gabriel Bouvigne
Josselin Mouette a écrit : BTW, while the note #2 is an "activist" one, note #1 is a "pragmatic one". LGPLv2 theoritically prevents any patent holder or patent to distribute LAME. That is a huge problem for some companies, and goes far beyond only LAME. It only prevents redistribution by hol

Re: [Lame-dev] LAME license

2010-08-27 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le jeudi 26 août 2010 à 23:27 +0200, Gabriel Bouvigne a écrit : > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.ffmpeg.devel/115654 > > > > Do you agree with this claim? > Without ressorting to any court, I share the opinion that every file > featuring the usual LPGLv2 header is only convered by