Clarify ASIO SDK usage

[hoffie]

It seems to be non-obvious how the ASIO SDK and its license integrates with Jamulus. We should do everything to make the situation more clear.

• Add a clause on the Windows ASIO client download page saying "Please note that you are not permitted to redistribute this binary without acquiring a licence agreement from Steinberg" (and in the About box)
• Make a Windows server download using "nosound" which doesn't touch ASIO SDK
• Verify that JACK Windows builds don't touch ASIO SDK Improve build logic for JACK-related builds & warn about ASIO #2443
• Check/update ASIO mentions regarding license requirements in
  • Installer Startup/Splash-screen ("ASIO" + copyrights notice - see 3.b in their Terms, logo is optional)
  • About dialog ("ASIO" + copyrights notice)
  • README.md (copyrights notice only)
  • Website ("ASIO" + copyrights notice, logo is optional).
• Sign the agreement and send it to Steinberg to cover jamulus.io's distribution of ASIO-enabled Windows binaries (we can't cover other usages, sadly) will be done post-3.9.0 as part of Sign Steinberg agreement #2687
  • Who from the team would be available to do that? @gilgongo + @pljones for deeper technical stuff
• Agree approach re. system GPL library exception vs additional terms notice
• Document that users who self-compile and distribute the result should check this for themselves (README.md as well?)
• Add pointers to the code to be careful about this topic, i.e. "never copy from ASIO SDK as it makes the situation more complicated"
  • windows/deploy_windows.ps1 Improve build logic for JACK-related builds & warn about ASIO #2443
  • windows/sound.h Improve build logic for JACK-related builds & warn about ASIO #2443

References:
See PDF in the SDK zip.

I'm currently don't plan to work on this myself, but I do think that we should move this forward for the next release and have added it to 3.9.0 therefore.

[gilgongo]

The approved wording for the copyright statement is: ”ASIO is a trademark and software of Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH”

[gilgongo]

OK so as further discussed on Discord just now, if we assume that the only issue is the distribution of the Windows client binary being the object of Steinberg's terms, then we don't have to worry about the source (which contains none of their code). Ergo, we don't need an addendum to the GPL. This assumes that because Steinberg don't mention source or binaries, we can interpret their rights granted for us to create "an application that can host ASIO device drivers" with the SDK as applying only to the binary, and the distribution (not use) of it.

I've updated the ticket with the actions we need to take, and will mark the above discussion items as "outdated" or "resolved".

[gilgongo]

I'm happy to sign the agreement once we have the stuff ready to publish on the website at least (app stuff can maybe wait a bit). In the box that says "Company or Organization" I assume it's just "Jamulus" (with me named as the representative).

There's also a "technical representative" needed. Any volunteers? I think they imply we have to print out the doc, sign it, then scan it and email the image to them.

[pljones]

I assume it's just "Jamulus"

Given the Github account is "jamulussoftware", I use "Jamulus Software" in full - that way it more clearly covers every usage under that account, rather than perhaps jamulussoftware/jamulus.

"technical representative"

Well, you know the set of qualifying volunteers. I'm happy to have my name there. Does it need my signature, too?

(Maybe photo your signature, cut-n-paste in an appropriate editor, print to PDF - no paper involved...)

[pgScorpio]

There's also a "technical representative" needed. Any volunteers?

If no one of the main contributers volunteer, I will.

[pljones]

#2605 is done ready, pending approve and merge.

Can someone update here on what's left? Are changes in progress where needed?

[gilgongo]

I think think the checklist is up to date (assuming we're OK with the installer screen )

[gilgongo]

We are now in compliance with what Steinberg want (once the next release goes live that is), so all that remains is to sign their agreement. We can presumably produce the nosound non-ASIO Windows server later as that's more about us than them.

I'll ping the relevant people for their signatures offline.

[ann0see]

Ok. The nosound build could also just be the JACK build, so I‘d say for now that’s the way to go without ASIO.

[pljones]

@gilgongo Any update on the admin side?

Also, can we open a separate issue to track any further work and close this one as complete for 3.9.0?

[ann0see]

Ah yes, and please do not hide the comments on this issue to make them visible without the need of being logged in. Especially for this kind of stuff, we should be transparent.

[pljones]

Just to add:

• Make a Windows server download using "nosound" which doesn't touch ASIO SDK

This is now called "serveronly" to make it clearer what it's for. The "no-ASIO" Windows client is the JACK one, as @ann0see says. I think this action can be marked done (i.e. I'm assuming the aim was for a non-ASIO Windows offering, not a server-only build).

[pljones]

@hoffie

• Sign the agreement and send it to Steinberg to cover jamulus.io's distribution of ASIO-enabled Windows binaries (we can't cover other usages, sadly)

From what I saw, I'd done my bit -- is there anything left from our side to do here?

[hoffie]

I think all code-wise stuff is done. If someone (@gilgongo? @pljones?) can confirm that the agreement has been signed and sent, then we can check that part and close the issue.
If we don't know the current state (I don't), we could open a new issue for tracking that part and close this one as done (which was mostly about tracking and the code).

[pljones]

Looks like we're stuck on this until we here from @gilgongo again.

[gilgongo]

Oops sorry - I was just thinking that we can only sign and send when we've released the changes.

[hoffie]

Ah, good point. If they check carefully (or at all), it might make sense to do it that way.
Maybe close this one as done as part of 3.9.0 and open a new issue for sending the agreement post-3.9.0?

[gilgongo]

OK let's do that then - closing this as done and I'll prep an issue.