Obxd synthesizer

[audiojunkie]

Indeed previous version binaries are still tied to GPL3 but be aware that the blobs, assets and resources have always been copyrighted to discoDSP and legally you're only allowed to distribute the plugin files without anything else in case you want to.

Which assets are these, exactly? Were they distributed with earlier versions, or as part of the work conveyed under GPL as a whole? Is it anything in the GitHub repository?

Given the language added to the GitHub repository ("This repository will remain available for historic purposes..."), it rather looks like your plan moving forward is for any further development to no longer be open source. That's fair, but if anyone else wants to take up development from the GPL version, it's important to know which assets in the repository you consider not to be covered by that license.

This is reasonable.

[audiojunkie]

replace the artwork

The custom artwork is not yours! Almost all good, usable OBXD skins were provided by the KVR community FOR FREE. And you, never asking permit of the authors, very arrogantly and ignorantly included them into software and charge money for other people's work. These skins were not designed by you, so you can't claim it.

I swear, if I were the author of those custom GUIs, I would cancel everything today. No more free stuff for you to sell. No custom skins, no preset banks, I would require you to strip OBXD of everything and leave just the bare bones.

Then I'd gladly look how many OBXD licenses you'd sell having a bald emperor with no clothes. Ungrateful swine.

The existing artwork was commissioned and licensed to George. Name calling doesn’t strengthen your argument. And you are the one acting ungrateful. George has been putting in his own development, and deserve recompense if he seeks it. If you don’t like it, go back to 2DAT’s original binaries or compile the plugin yourself.

[audiojunkie]

Artwork and any other non-source code blobs always retain their own copyright. You can compile the project perfectly without those.

These parts need to be separated and clarified on GitHub.

[george]

These parts need to be separated and clarified on GitHub.

Already done.

[audiojunkie]

Wow wow, calm down a little bit

I’m calm, but frankly quite shocked at the ingratitude and the false sense of entitlement coming from so many people. Clearly, this aspect of open source (which is great, by the way) is not well understood amongst some of the KVR crowd.

[Vortifex]

..

[audiojunkie]

There is a problem here with assets not being openly usable with a GPL project.

We expect to be able to use GPL based projects for any purpose, that is part of the (GPL) license.
obxd has already been packaged in archlinux for example https://archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/ob-xd/ which always built from source and there never was a EULA or extra license agreement for the use of the source.

It has now been clarified in https://github.com/reales/OB-Xd/issues/82 that this usage of the project is not allowed because it contains copyrighted artwork that is not suitable for distribution.
There was no mention of this on the source code before.

It sounds like this part needs to be straightened out and clarified. In my opinion, the proprietary bits need to be kept separate from the GPL source code to make things more clear.

[OBSOLETE160530]

[DELETED]

[audiojunkie]

Nothing has changed with the source code licensing.

Certainly, the current source is and will remain available for others to fork under GPL. The fact that the repo now says it "will remain available for historic purposes" suggests that future discoDSP development on it will no longer be open source. But we shall see.

The GPL component needs a better separation from the commercial part, that I agree. George needs to separate these components and clearly define which is which. Only the GPL part of the code is legally useable for everyone. This software has now become somewhat of a hybrid project—which is perfectly acceptable, and done all the time—but the parts need to clearly separated and clearly defined. It looks like FalkTX plans to fork it under his umbrella of projects, so that the fork can remain completely free with no commercial pieces. I think that is actually for the best. Those who want continued commercial development and support can use George’s binaries. Those who want a version completely free of all commercial aspects can use the forked version.

[audiojunkie]

There is a problem here with assets not being openly usable with a GPL project.

We expect to be able to use GPL based projects for any purpose, that is part of the (GPL) license.
obxd has already been packaged in archlinux for example https://archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/ob-xd/ which always built from source and there never was a EULA or extra license agreement for the use of the source.

It has now been clarified in https://github.com/reales/OB-Xd/issues/82 that this usage of the project is not allowed because it contains copyrighted artwork that is not suitable for distribution.
There was no mention of this on the source code before.

It's the same deal with VCV Rack and other open source projects. The artwork and the code are different licenses because the copyrights belong to different people. If I create a skin from scratch and share it, I own that copyright, not George. That's why you technically can't share skins without getting permission from the authors. I assume most authors wouldn't mind, but you should ask. Someone reached out to me about an old skin I created, if it's one I made from scratch, feel free to use it as long as you're not selling it. If it's a mod I did of some other skin (I recolored some Ilka Rosma skins), then I don't own that and you'd need the original author's permission.

Exactly this!

[audiojunkie]

These parts need to be separated and clarified on GitHub.

Already done.

Perfect!

[rasmusklump]

Wow wow, calm down a little bit

I’m calm, but frankly quite shocked at the ingratitude and the false sense of entitlement coming from so many people. Clearly, this aspect of open source (which is great, by the way) is not well understood amongst some of the KVR crowd.

I haven't meant you. Forgot to quote.

[DRMR]

The GPL allows no other restrictions on its terms and requires publication of the source code. The personal license agreement with the original author waives this, so all is well for now.

Well no. That personal agreement only applies to the code as it was last published by 2DaT. (btw has Oli Larkin, a contributor to the previous code-base, agreed to wave their rights?)

Any contributions you and others have made since then were done under the GPL, you can't simply dual license all of that work retroactively as it was derivative.
Did all contributors to your fork, including those of assets and other "non-code" objects (and not identifiable by commit), wave their rights to be used as you please as well?

Please do your due diligence if you are trying to pull shit like this.

[OBSOLETE160530]

[DELETED]

[audiojunkie]

Guys! This is simple! You are making it too complicated! Here are the simple rules:

1. The software is open source, Yay! YOU can do anything you want to with the source code, as long as you obey the GPL. You can compile it yourself and use it in any way the GPL license allows—even commercially. You can even get a developer friend to compile it for you for free if you want. It’s open source, and George has provided years of improvements at his own cost to continue developing it. I’m grateful!

What does this mean for someone who wants to download a .dll file for their plugin folder?

What this means, is that if you have the programming know-how, the GPL part of the source code, which is available to the public, can be run through a compiler program to create a working DLL library (plugin) that you can put into your plugin folder.

In George’s case, he’s obtained special licensure from the original developer that allows him to essentially do more (business-wise) than the rest of us who are bound by the existing GPL license. In his case, he’s simply adding the stipulation that if you want to use the binaries he creates and supports, you must pay a fee in order to do so legally—which in my opinion, is fair. You can purchase the binary (in Windows’ case, a DLL) from George, and use that plugin commercially.

Because this software is composed of GPL licensed components and proprietary components, if a fork is made to the source code, the proprietary parts will need to be replaced by someone in order to compile a completely working program. This is where other open source developers can come in and replace the proprietary components and license those components under a GPL type of license to allow for a fully compilable plugin. This is what FalkTX has indicated he plans to do. And if that happens as FalkTX plans. And 100% of the code required to create the binary is licensed as GPL, then there will no restrictions whatsoever (other than the GPL) keeping anyone from compiling and providing complete binaries for free.

Although sometimes complicated, this is where the benefit lies over commercial software. Take a look at Cardinal and VCV Rack. Or look at Vital. There are a lot of similar models for how all of this can be done.

For example, Vital was released as open source. Whatever code was written, and whatever stipulations were made when the GPL was created apply. In the case of Vital, the preset store had to be removed and the name changed (amongst other things). This has been done a couple of times, under names like Vitality and Vitalium. Those forked projects are available on the internet for anyone to use as long as they obey the GPL.

However, as far as I can tell, little has been done with those forked versions, and that is a risk with open source. The commercial version has been continuously developed while the forked code has sat. Vital is probably a better product than the forked versions. In addition to that, the Vital developer has priced the commercial version so well, that there is little reason to use Vitality or Vitalium when you can get the fully supported version so cheaply.

In another example, Cardinal has seen continuous development and has had an incredible amount of popularity. Cardinal works great! The same with Surge-XT—it has had phenomenal support by a team of open source developers. These are great examples of open source at its best—no copy protection is used, and there’s no company to go out of business. You will always be able to use these apps as long as they are actively maintained and kept compatible with the current OS.

Then there is the original code for OB-XD that has seen no development whatsoever since it was released—except for the work that George has done. You can’t resize that code for larger screens. You can’t save presets. The code is not up to date with the latest frameworks. George has modernized the code even the original GPL parts. The fork that FalkTX will make from George’s work on the GPL parts of the program will make that for far superior to the original code released by 2Dat.

So, it comes down to this: open source is great! It allows developers to freely work and release code, and if it is well supported, like Surge-XT, nothing else is needed. However, if the open sourced code is neglected, it doesn’t do much good. In that case, it is just as well to buy a well supported binary like for example, Vital or DiscoPSP’s OB-XD.