Correct LICENSE to GPL-2.0

[umireon]

I know you don't like GPL but since we are linking to the GPL-2.0 product named OBS, we have to obey the GPL-2.0 license.
I don't assume that publishing our product under MIT License is permitted under GPL-2.0 terms and I suppose all of the OBS plugins on the earth must be GPL-2.0.

GNU GPLv2

The GNU GPL is the most widely used free software license and has a strong copyleft requirement. When distributing derived works, the source code of the work must be made available under the same license. There are multiple variants of the GNU GPL, each with different requirements.

https://choosealicense.com/licenses/gpl-2.0/

[royshil]

i don't know if this is true
we are not modifying OBS code, this is an external plugin

can you find examples for GPL2 restriction on plugins?
i'm trying to read around to educate myself, but i can't find any instructions on plugins, or even discussion in the forum

[umireon]

we are not modifying OBS code, this is an external plugin

Unfortunately, no, GPL thinks our work is a part of OBS.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html.en#GPLStaticVsDynamic

Linking a GPL covered work statically or dynamically with other modules is making a combined work based on the GPL covered work. Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole combination.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html.en#TheGPLSaysModifiedVersions

Section 2 says that modified versions you distribute must be licensed to all third parties under the GPL.

can you find examples for GPL2 restriction on plugins?

The restriction of GPL-2.0 is that the plugins can not virtually be sold because the source code must be public under GPL-2.0.
https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/obs-license-infringement.141405/

[royshil]

we are not modifying OBS code, this is an external plugin

Unfortunately, no, GPL thinks our work is a part of OBS.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html.en#GPLStaticVsDynamic

Linking a GPL covered work statically or dynamically with other modules is making a combined work based on the GPL covered work. Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole combination.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html.en#TheGPLSaysModifiedVersions

Section 2 says that modified versions you distribute must be licensed to all third parties under the GPL.

can you find examples for GPL2 restriction on plugins?

The restriction of GPL-2.0 is that the plugins can not virtually be sold because the source code must be public under GPL-2.0. https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/obs-license-infringement.141405/

ok you make a valid point.

i'm not dying on this hill, so let's change the license to GPLv2.

[umireon]

@royshil I appreciate your kind understanding because this change is hard to accept 🙇
Once I search for a way to avoid releasing my plugin under GPL-2.0 but I found there was no way and I was very disappointed....

[umireon]

@royshil The author of this plugin is you and thus you should make this change.
There might be a legal problem if a non-author made this commit to change its license.
Could you please create another PR with the appropriate changes and then I will approve it?

[umireon]

Superceded by #201