[Freepats] Re: GPL for sound samples

[Roberto Gordo Saez]

On 4/14/06, Richard Stallman <rms at gnu.org> wrote:
>     - Compatibility with other licenses. I think mixing different sounds
>     should be not limited. It can be very difficult to use only GPL
>     compatible sounds on a composition, and it is likely people would
>     avoid to use GPL sounds in this case.
>
> If you use the proposed exception, this will not be an issue at all.
> The exception will permit such mixing without limit, in a composition.

So, Richard Stallman has same view as Mark. I'm still not convinced
for myself; if this is true, I can see some very easy ways for a
company to legally jump over GPL requirements.

>     - The terms given on GPL may not be directly applicable to sounds.
>
> I think it is.
>
>     Compilers, executable, linking, and other terms can be interpreted in
>     different ways, and terms like public performance, broadcast or
>     interpretation are missing.
>
> Broadcast is a kind of copying, but you're right that public
> performance should be addressed.  The exception can give permission
> for public performance.

Again, I still have many concerns here. GPL can be interpreted in a
good way, but lawyers tends to push licenses in a way that favors
their position. GPL terms becomes much undefined when applied to works
that are not software. I would prefer to be fully convinced with more
solid arguments than "i think it is", but anyway, it looks that I am
the only one who sees a problem with GPL under this kind of usage, so
I will accept your other opinions.

Now it is time to continue searching for quality samples.