From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N3PzJ-0000Jm-Pf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:04:05 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N3PzF-0000EP-1B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:04:05 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59084 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N3PzE-0000ED-Qh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:04:00 -0400 Received: from mail-px0-f179.google.com ([209.85.216.179]:47455) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N3PzE-0005hB-8u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:04:00 -0400 Received: by pxi9 with SMTP id 9so1033520pxi.4 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:03:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091029075211.GA9828@miranda.arrow> References: <200910281650.AA00165@YOUR-BD18D6DD63.m1.interq.or.jp> <20091028200817.GA8945@miranda.arrow> <4AE8BDB8.2050606@gnu.org> <20091029075211.GA9828@miranda.arrow> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:03:59 +0800 Message-ID: <473191350910290103r19199901j704d7e3ea659df11@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 22/25] ay8910: YM2608 core forked from MAME 0.59 From: Roy Tam Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stuart Brady Cc: Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Version 0.37a of fmopl.c/h is relicensed to LGPL by Tatsuyuki Satoh(original fmopl developer). other versions are not. Especially newer versions by Jarek Burczynski as he refused to relicense new fmopl to LGPL. 2009/10/29 Stuart Brady : > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:55:04PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 10/28/2009 09:08 PM, Stuart Brady wrote: >> >On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 01:50:11AM +0900, TAKEDA, toshiya wrote: >> >>+ >> >>+/* This version of ay8910.c is a fork of the MAME 0.59 one, relicensed >> >>under the LGPL. >> > >> >Where have you taken this from? >> >> More exactly, how is this not violating copyright, since MAME's license >> is not compatible with anything else (more or less)? > > For that matter, fmopl.c in QEMU looks an awful lot like a copyright > violation to me: > > http://www.google.com/codesearch?q=%22This+version+of+fmopl.c%22 > > Cheers, > -- > Stuart Brady > > >