Slashdot Mirror
IP Theft in the Linux Kernel
"They just took my code and filed off the copyright" said Søren. "This is clearest with the two header files hptraid.h and pdcraid.h. Compare these with FreeBSD's ata-raid.h, and just look at the similarities." And it's true that these two header files certainly look like a chopped up copy of the FreeBSD header, after a quick search-and-replace. "The reading of the RAID config from the disks is their own code, but is clearly "inspired" from our code," said Søren, "but that's encouraged by the license. It's the verbatim use of the other code without retaining the copyright that's the problem."
ata-raid.h, and the other files, are copyright Søren, and released under the three clause BSD license, which includes the restriction "Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice". So using these files, or significant portions of them, in your own code, without retaining the copyright information, as has happened here, is prohibited.
You may be thinking "This is only a couple of header files, what's the big deal?". As Søren says "The problem here is that the structures in the headers is the whole story. That info tells how you read the proprietary struct off the disks, and was reverse engineered and documented by me after a lot of effort." Søren's intellectual property is tied up in those files.
Right now, Søren is in discussions with the authors of the Linux ATA drivers (employed by RedHat) to ensure that his copyright notice is returned to these and other files, and to ensure that this situation does not recur. And it is hoped that an amicable solution can be reached.
Why post this on Slashdot when the issue is nearly resolved? If you want to send out a message then the place to post would be the Linux kernel mailing list.
Monkey sense
How many proprietary programs/operating systems have "stolen" GPL/BSD code and never told anyone. I mean, how would anyone ever know unless they could see the source?
If that helps you sleep at night, no problem with me.
At least I'm not feeding the trolls.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
I may be. But at least I don't do myself the indignity of referring to them in that manner prior to mealtime.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
...is not that the code was "borrowed", but what people are saying about it. So far, the highest-modded comments say:
* If this had been included in WindowsXP he wouldn't have known, so he couldn't have complained. Yay GPL!
* Why post this on Slashdot if the issue is resolved?
* This code was reverse-engineered anyway, so why is he bitching when we leech it?
Lord almighty the hypocrites in this place.
My response:
* Microsoft *has* included BSD code, and they've done everything they're supposed to. Why can't we ever have a discussion like this where we admit we're wrong? Sometimes we can say something without promoting the GPL or Linux.
* Why post on Slashdot if it's resolved? Think about this: if MS had taken code from Linux and used it, and then it was resolved, it would still be posted on Slashdot and people would be ready to beat down Bill G's door and crucify him.
* Of course the code was reverse-engineered. And Jesus, how often do we bitch on here about how we should have the right to reverse-engineer? When someone else does it, it's low - when Linux does it (and trust me, a large number of Linux drivers are reverse-engineered), it's the best thing since sliced bread. Remember, kiddies - Linux does something, it's good; Anyone else does the *exact same thing* and it's bad.
Sometimes I just get sick of the people who bash religion and then follow Linus like he's God...*sigh*
...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
Hey!
Paint not with a broad brush!
This is clearly the fault of just one company: RedHat. Their programmers are the ones who "wrote" the code. The vast majority of Linux coders give credit where credit is due.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
If he cut and past the code into there he had to know that the licenses are completely incompatbile if he did include the copyright. He didn't include the copyright and hoped nobody would notice.
The only right way to solve this is have somebody re-do that part of the kernel or work with the original developer to ask him to license that code to the Linux Kernel effort as GPL. Hell he might have been willing to do that if somebody hadn't gone out and stolen it outright.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
And just so people know where to throw their flames to:
.org
linux-kernel@vger.kernel
You don't need to be subscribed to the list to successfully send stuff to it, so post away!
If you actually do want to subscribe to the list send a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with the following in the body:
subscribe linux-kernel malda@slashdot.org
where malda@slashdot.org will be replaced by your email address.
An archive of the list can be found at http://boudicca.tux.org/hypermail/linux-kernel/
Hope this helps!
While it is no excuse for omitting the license/copyright text on the headerfile. However this issue has already been resolved within minutes after Søren notified me of the omission, to the satisfaction of Søren. Unfortionatly, Slasdhot only reports the first half of this, even though the second half of the story has been available for some time. In no way was or is it my intent to not give credit where credit is due.
Now compare this to the typical reaction when it's suspected that GPL code has been used . . .
When GPL code is misappropriated, the lynch mobs form. When GPL code misapprorpriates other code, it seems to be a different story . . .
hawk
Funny, reminds me of when I was at uni. I used to code a lot of stuf with a mate. We were so in tune with each others coding and ideas that on one of our assignments the first 4 or so lines of our programs were identical. To the byte. We had to purposely check to make sure we weren't writing code to similar.
Pete,
You have a point, but I want to make the other point about where all the information is generated. I will lighten up later, but I want to prove the point of eating crow when one carelessly drags private issues public.
Regards,
Andre Hedrick
Linux ATA Development