> Are SAOL and SASL documents considered source code? Could I release
> instruments and compositions under the GNU general public license?
Sure, there are tricky miscibility issues here, though -- is a .mp4
file that contains two GPL SAOL instrs and a third SAOL instr that
isn't miscible with the GPL a violation of the GPL? Or are instrs
not quite like that? It's easier to see if your distributing opcode
libraries that other people make instrs out of -- the parallels with
C program GPL license issues are clearer. But for instrs, it could
very well be that (rough analogy):
-- Each instr is like a program
-- SASL is a shell script that runs the programs
In which case, just like its OK to have commercial and GPL apps on
the computer, running from the same shell script, w/o violating the
GPL, its OK to put GPL'd and non-GPL'd instrs in the same .mp4 file.
I'm not a lawyer -- I have no idea which model is legally correct here.
But these are the sorts of things you'll need to consider ...
BTW, the next sfront release is going to have a set of very low-level
SAOL libraries, to do things like provide a nicer programming interface
to MIDIctrl[], supply opcodes for the transcendental functions SAOL
doesn't have, ect. These will be under the LGPL, which is essentially
a BSD-ish sort of license, and so people will be able to use it with
commercial apps, ect.
--jl
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Lazzaro -- Research Specialist -- CS Division -- EECS -- UC Berkeley
lazzaro [at] cs [dot] berkeley [dot] edu www.cs.berkeley.edu/~lazzaro
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 28 2002 - 11:46:39 EST