Why not LGPL?

[zodiepupper]

Hello, I'm building an MIT licensed open source XR social platform and I'm wanting to contribute all the effort back to the Godot asset library for others to use in their games.

I found this library and have been very excited to get started working with it, but I have a concern. My project aims to allow users to export XR games made within our ecosystem as standalone binaries at some point, which would mean that our users would not be able to sell their games and this could likely lead to some interesting legal issues if we used 3dti audio toolkit.

Would it be possible to re-license 3dti audio toolkit as LGPL instead of GPL so it may be compatible with a wider range of project types?

[areyesl]

Hello. Our apologies for this very late response. We have been negotiating with our institutions in the past weeks about a change of the license and we didn't have a clear road-map until now.

Now the plan is to move the 3DTI Audiotoolkit to a more open license, probably MIT license. It will still take some weeks though. Stay tuned ;-).

The Binaural Rendering Toolbox - (BRT) where the 3DTI Audiotoolkit algorithms, together with other new binaural rendering algorithms, are being integrated in a more open and flexible architecture, will remain GPL for the moment.

Regards
Arcadio

[ThreeDeeJay]

@areyesl Any news on 3DTI moving to MIT? 👀
I'm a huge fan of the sound distance simulation implementation and was wondering if we could borrow at least the relevant code to integrate it into OpenAL Soft which many apps/games can use but I'm not sure if licenses are compatible at the moment since it uses LGPL🙏
kcat/openal-soft#1113 (comment)