How do you figure that? My understanding with the GPL is that, if we
were to use fdmf-derived code to generate fdmf signatures, than we would
have to make the source of that program available. The data which said
program generates would not, itself, be under the GPL. As for the server
matching algorithm, either we use the mtree stuff Russ is working on,
which is not related to fdmf, or we use some derivative of the fdmf
code, meaning we'd have to release the code for the server matching
component. But even if we had to do that, I don't see how this precludes
selling data licenses.
Though, I could see how selling data licenses might preclude the
possibility of using the mtree solution..... maybe they'd be willing to
make an exception for MB....
Paul Taylor wrote:
> This is a shame better if it was LGPL, MusicBrainz may be opensrc but
> I think it gets alot of its funding by selling datalicenses. If this
> data includes fdmf any commercial/shareware applications wont be able
> to match on fdmf because they wont be able to use the library to
> generate fdmf fingerprints reducing the worth of the data.
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-devel mailing list
>
MusicBrainz-devel@...
>
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-devel_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-devel mailing list
MusicBrainz-devel@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-devel
