Fix JUCE EULA's dual licensing clause

Commercial / Licences
1

I requested to package Helio Sequencer on Void Linux, which is a DAW supports plugins based on JUCE. However, the request was denied as Void Linux is licensed under BSD, and according to them, the licensing terms seem to prohibit downloading JUCE without disclosing the source, even if it is not being distributed.

That is because the LICENSE file on the repository and the license page on the website only show the EULA, which according to them presents a forced GPL licensing which is more restrictive than the normal GPL.

Here’s the relevant discussion: New package: helio-sequencer-3.12 by iFoundSilentHouse · Pull Request #49361 · void-linux/void-packages · GitHub

I read the FAQ and saw that JUCE is actually dual licensed, but they seem to care about how that isn’t mentioned in the official JUCE license document.

I suggest either adding the GPL LICENSE file alongside the EULA in the repository and doing the same on the website, or clarifying the EULA well.

2

Apparently the problem is that the EULA says that you should distribute “your applications under GPL”, and not “our applications” or “your applications bundled with JUCE”.

That could mean any project by the Void maintainers should be distributed under GPL, which they don’t want to sign up to.

The FAQ and the source headers clarify this well, but that’s not the same in the LICENSE file. So they can’t say that JUCE is under GPL or a custom free license.

3

This is addressed in the upcoming JUCE 8 release: GitHub - juce-framework/JUCE at juce8