Does anyone object to putting libspotify into non-free? I've put together a package, but I'm not sure what their redistribution policy is. The main thing in their Terms of Use seems to be that it's for non-commercial use, but I don't think that's a problem for non-free.

On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 22:55 +1100, David Timms wrote: > On 04/01/12 22:31, Jonathan Dieter wrote: > > Does anyone object to putting libspotify into non-free?  I've put > > together a package, but I'm not sure what their redistribution policy > > is.  The main thing in their Terms of Use seems to be that it's for > > non-commercial use, but I don't think that's a problem for non-free. > For those of us not in the know: What is the URL to point to some info > about the software ? Sorry, here it is: http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/

On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 13:42 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > 2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter <jdieter(a)lesbg.com&gt;: > > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 22:55 +1100, David Timms wrote: > >> On 04/01/12 22:31, Jonathan Dieter wrote: > >> > Does anyone object to putting libspotify into non-free?  I've put > >> > together a package, but I'm not sure what their redistribution policy > >> > is.  The main thing in their Terms of Use seems to be that it's for > >> > non-commercial use, but I don't think that's a problem for non-free. > >> For those of us not in the know: What is the URL to point to some info > >> about the software ? > > > > Sorry, here it is: > > http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/ > > Hello, > > It might be redistributable but then for which usage ? > Do you know a package that will use this library and at the same time, > don't plan to embed the exact libspotify version they will use to > instead, rely on a system library ? > > Also, I'm not sure about what the application key is for ? I'm looking at mopidy (http://www.mopidy.com) which is a MPD server that uses Spotify as it's music source.  It doesn't come with libspotify bundled, and I've put together packages for it, pyspotify, libspotify and pykka.  AFAIC, whatever application key is needed is embedded in mopidy.  FWIW, Mopidy, pyspotify and pykka are all licensed under ASL 2.0.

On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 14:27 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > 2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter <jdieter(a)lesbg.com&gt;: > > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 13:42 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > >> 2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter <jdieter(a)lesbg.com&gt;: > >> > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 22:55 +1100, David Timms wrote: > >> >> On 04/01/12 22:31, Jonathan Dieter wrote: > >> >> > Does anyone object to putting libspotify into non-free? I've put > >> >> > together a package, but I'm not sure what their redistribution policy > >> >> > is. The main thing in their Terms of Use seems to be that it's for > >> >> > non-commercial use, but I don't think that's a problem for non-free. > >> >> For those of us not in the know: What is the URL to point to some info > >> >> about the software ? > >> > > >> > Sorry, here it is: > >> > http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/ > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> It might be redistributable but then for which usage ? > >> Do you know a package that will use this library and at the same time, > >> don't plan to embed the exact libspotify version they will use to > >> instead, rely on a system library ? > >> > >> Also, I'm not sure about what the application key is for ? > > > > I'm looking at mopidy (http://www.mopidy.com) which is a MPD server that > > uses Spotify as it's music source. It doesn't come with libspotify > > bundled, and I've put together packages for it, pyspotify, libspotify > > and pykka. AFAIC, whatever application key is needed is embedded in > > mopidy. FWIW, Mopidy, pyspotify and pykka are all licensed under ASL > > 2.0. > > OK, But then this just move the problem elsewhere. > What is the application key for mopidy allowed to be redistributed ? > Will we be able to build mopidy from source and bundle their key ? When I build mopidy from source, it works. There's a file in the source tarball that's called spotify_appkey.key, so I'm assuming that's the application key.

Le 5 janv. 2012 06:51, "Jonathan Dieter" <jdieter(a)lesbg.com&gt; a écrit : > I guess I'll go ahead and open up the review requests, unless I hear any > other concerns. Good to me.