Les Mikesell wrote: > You apparently haven't actually read the GPL. Please note the > parts that say you can't restrict further redistribution and > that you can't redistribute at all unless the work as a whole > meets the terms of the GPL. That depends on many things as well. Redistribution as a whole if the parts are distinct is permitted (the "mere aggregation" clause). > And in fact it doesn't say > anything specific about the cost of the source, so I'm not > sure what you did read... It says that "equivalent access" must be of the source code to whomever receives the binaries in question. This means that the maximum price for the copy of source code, if it was not given with the binaries, may at most be that price of the copy of the binaries. Please see the FSF's "Selling Software" page for more information: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html#HighOrLowFeesAndGPL > Yes, you might interpret the GPL advocates as being against > the laws of our country. Simply being law does not make it the right thing in many cases. > Let me know when studios start producing interesting content > using that codec. Unfortunate it has not caught-on as much as MPEG (used in DVDs) or Apple's QuickTime due to the fact not many major OSes support it "out of the box." Though, Xiph does provide DirectShow filters for all of the various multimedia codecs it uses: the Ogg container, FLAC, Speex, and Vorbis audio, and the Theora video codec. Hopefully these major market players will find its licensing (revised BSD) quite suitable for inclusion into the "mainstream" desktops. -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) This message was sent through a webmail interface, and thus not signed.
