[SDL] Examples for SDL_sound

Gaëtan de Menten ged at bugfactory.org
Wed Jul 31 14:59:00 PDT 2002


Has anyone looked at the FSF take on all this?

If you read what the FSF says about situations like this, it basically says
that the LGPL is a copyright, so unless the copyright holders decide to
press you, you're ok.  Sam wrote on libsdl.org that we were free to violate
the LGPL in certain conditions, so I doubt these minor differences are going
to be a problem.  And I dont think that there is a big problem if everyone
continues to use SDL in a moral and responsible way.  Unless we start
getting cease & desist letters from lawers of Mr. Lantinga I dont think this
issue needs to be stressed as much as it is. (By the way, I personally try
to follow the LGPL to the best of my understanding, if I was contacted by a
copyright holder saying I somehow violated the License I'd remedy the
situation without protest.)

----- Original Message -----
From: "nbs" <nbs at sonic.net>
Newsgroups: loki.open-source.sdl
To: <sdl at libsdl.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 1:16 AM
Subject: Re: [SDL] SDL LGPL violations


> On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 01:18:15PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > > Methinks FSF needs to update LGPL ((c) 1991) for that newfangled
> > > Interweb Netsplorer stuff that Al Gore created.
> > >
> > > ;)
> >
> >                   GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
> >                        Version 2.1, February 1999
> >
> >  Copyright (C) 1991, 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> >      59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307  USA
>
> Interesting.  Ok, and I just looked more closely:
>
> $ locate COPYING | grep -i sdl
> /home/kendrick/SDL_image-1.2.1/COPYING
>
>
> I was looking at >SDL_image<'s LGPL.  And it's v.2, from 1991
>
> -bill!
>





More information about the SDL mailing list