Slashdot Mirror
Mplayer Charges License Violation
Several people have submitted stories about the author of Mplayer accusing Warpvision of, err, "borrowing" their code for Warpvision's OS/2 player. I have two reactions - one, someone still uses OS/2? And two, something about imitation being the sincerest form of flattery...Update from CD: Hold on there, everyone. I downloaded the WarpVision source and lo and behold the GPL is there in all its free software glory. I think Mplayer spoke too soon, too rashly, or alternatively, WarpVision was just too slow to update thier site. I'd love to hear both sides of this before we all freak out. Further Info: It was pointed out to me (CD) that the MPlayer program itself is not Open Source software (it calls itself Basically GPL, which, BTW, hasn't been approved by the OSI), so in the end this might just be proprietary software piracy. (Yawn)
Michael, please click the link to Mplayer's site. They took the entirety of the mplayer source, changed the output plugin for OS/2, and released it as binary-only. It appears that source has now been released and the issue has been resolved, but at least read the article before letting them off light. They tried to pull a fast one on Mplayer using very little or no code of their own. I don't know if you call that imitation, I call it stealing.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
Who knows the truth? I don't, but if they did "borrow" the code, at least they 'fessed up pretty quick. Perhaps we should of asked first what was happening?
I have suffered way too many "Still using CLI?" for using Linux, haven't you? If someone want to *write* programs for OS/2, all the power to them. "Burrowing" source code is not so good, but that is cleared up now (read above posts!).
Codeala - Just another mindless drone
how can a russian coder steal source code? he's using it in a way the author did not intend, but he's not under the same laws. in russia, code is not property, and unless it is property, it cannot be stolen.
My division of Prudential Insurance (Can't say where, sorry) uses OS/2 on all its desktops here, that's 3,000 machines. Nifty OS!
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
" I have two reactions - one, someone still uses OS/2? And two, something about imitation being the sincerest form of flattery..."
So basically, if I break in and steal Michael's computer, he won't want me prosecuted so long as I explain to him that I was flattering him by imitating him
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
...
Isn't that the ./-way?
Buurrrap. Oops, must've been the turkey.
Poof.
so yeah, it looks like they *did* steal some source code from mplayer. "but now they've released source, its ok," you say. no it isn't. apparently, they now claim that warpvision is/was GPL software. well, mplayer is released under a couple of licenses... its not all GPL, so that does not allow redistribution completely under GPL for derived works. (does that make sense to antybody else?) hmmm...
i do have to say, however, that i'm a bit disappointed in Arpad's rather immature reaction.
Arpad! you listening? rabit, knee-jerk reactions like this make us look bad. i have a lot of respect for you as a programmer, but your reaction is way out of line.
"They will die a dog's death for sure I swear!" its SOFTWARE, for god's sake. lighten up.
The update to this story mentions that everything's ok because the WarpVision code has the GPL, but the Mplayer author contends that Mplayer is not GPL, hence the following quote from the Mplayer homepage:
They also claim to be GPL. They aren't because MPlayer that they modified, also isn't GPL. It has its own license. So that's another lie.
"Now gluttony and exploitation serves eight!" - TV's Frank
Check the Mplayer web site. (they have an update in response to the source release) This is not resolved yet.
One of the big issues appears to be that Warpvision is GPL, but Mplayer is NOT GPL. It has its own, different license. Just taking the code and changing the license to one you like better (even if it is the GPL) is not acceptable, no matter how much credit you give people.
They stole, but this is not what they stole. Using someone else's code is not stealing, since the party whose code is used does not lose their code. Under the GPL, this sort of using is encouraged. After all, this is one of the things Free Software is truly about. So they did not "take" Mplayer's code, or "steal" Mplayer's code, they used it, and that's fine.
But then, they stole. (If indeed this is what happened... that's what is claimed, and seems to be resolved, and we will for discussion assume it is the case.) They stole from the community the right and ability to reuse and modify the code. This is what the GPL is designed to protect. And this is where we must be careful.
Code cannot be stolen. No form of "intellectual property" can be stolen by being copied and used. This is not stealing, there is no loss. The loss and theft occurs when the right and ability to modify and use or reuse is taken away. This right is the only thing that can truly be taken away by theft. Let us all beware of such things.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
OS/2 is still widely used in banking, as the underlying OS for ATM machines and elsewhere whenever uptime and reliability are of utmost importance. Personally, I haven't used it in five years, just thought I'd let you know.
Micheal, I would suggest you try to learn a few things about OS/2 before you assume that it is dead.
Many banks all around the world use OS/2 for their ATMs and office computers because of one reason, it is even more rocksolid than your precious Linux/Unix.
The last released version of OS/2, Warp Ver 4 (merlin) was amazing. In 1991 it had and impresive list of features such as: Voice recognition software that was 98%+ accurate;
OpenGL 1.0; every network protocol nameable, Partial Win32 API compatibility and full Win16 compatibility.
As Slashdoters, you should support OS/2 and learn about it. It was most likely one of the most powerful and stable operating systems in existence, and probably still is. It had great potential to become THE operating system. If it wasn't for Microsoft boycoting/strong arming IBM out of development of OS/2. I would suggest you read "Hard Drive" which is a biography of Bill Gates and Microsoft. (It is written by an author with the last name Wallace. I can't remeber his first name). It explains the situation very well.
I am quite shocked that you sheepish Slashdotters would not like OS/2. You should just because of the fact that Microsoft took it down. Obviously you are not a knowledgable herd of sheep. (You can run Xfree86 in OS/2!!!! WOWZERS!)
In truth I use Windows XP. I would use 0S/2 if it wasn't so hard to install and if it had a greater list of features. OS/2 does have alot of problems to overcome in the modern day, and probably isn't the best operating system to use on a daily bassis for regular computer usage. (sounds like linux to me.) It could have been, and still could be though.
Maybe you should get both sides of the story before posting it to Slashdot in the first place?
max
A few weeks ago there was something about a company reselling parts of products of another company. The EULA said this was not allowed, but when taken to court it was said that in order to take parts from a bundle of software, you don't have to install it and therefore you may not have read the license and most certainly not have clicked `i agree'. Actually this situation resembles the MPlayer-situation a bit. It's waaay to easy to install MPlayer without ever reading about some license. Most source-files are totally license-less. I wonder what would have happened if this particular case would have been taken to court...but I'm glad that wasn't necessary.
0x or or snor perron?!
I remember seeing a Meridian phone system (the hub that all the phone lines go into) and it was running OS/2! I was really surprised and my first thought was, "That's fuckin' cool!"
You just plugged a keyboard and mouse into the inside of it, and if you had the right boot disk, you could load up the software and change stuff. OS/2 was the heart of the phone system.
I just thought it was really cool that you could change mailboxes and stuff without using a phone, but a real keyboard.
I have no signature
On the MPlayer News page, it is also claimed that WarpVision forgot to mention the authors of ffmpeg in their credits file. The strange thing is, ffmpeg is released under the GPL, and is also used by MPlayer -- then, I wonder, how can MPlayer not be released under the GPL?
Now who's in violation of the GPL here?
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
How does that work?
Alas the WarpVision mailing list isn't archived anywhere that I know of, but I'll do my best to sumarise:
Someone noticed that WarpVision had changed a lot between two versions, doing some things better but some no longer. Someone else then noticed that the debug output was much like that of MPlayer
At that point, the MPlayer guys were alearted, and decided that it was very likely that WarpVision was an uncredited port of MPlater to OS/2, and also a closed source one. They mailed the WarpVision Developers, and asked what was up.
The WarpVision guys initially played dum, then said they had only used a tiny bit of code and would release the source later.
Tempers flared, and a lot of discussion went on between the WarpVision guys and the MPlayer guys. In the end, the WarpVision developers credited MPlayer, and released the source.
Now, the flame is over who was in the wrong, who needs to apologise, and if the projects should remain seperate, or if the WarpVision changes should go into the offical MPlayer tree. The issue isn't resolved, but the GPL violation is
This post will enter the public domain 70 years after my death, unless Disney buys another extension.
My understanding is that we can thank MS for the single input queue--and by the time MS dumped it, there was a large pile of software that expected it. I'll agree that it's broken, but to some extent IBM was stuck with it, and Warp 4 provides a way (admittedly requiring human intervention) to unwedge it.
Believe it or not, there is this thing called "open source", based on the little-known fact that if you get information from someone, they still have it. Or at least I think some guys named Thomas Jefferson, Richard Stallman, and Eric Raymond were saying something about that. I think they, like, said something about how it's different from material things because you don't deprive the original owner of it when you "steal" it.
Good analogy, otherwise. *cough*
Beleive it or not, there is something called 'intellectual property'. This has absolutely nothing to do with open source. If you don't believe me try grabbing a copy of the code for Windows XP, rebuilding it, packaging it as your own and selling it. I am sure Thomas Jefferson will rise from the dead to defend you from yourself when you do. *cough* *cough* *hack* holy shit
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
The few times I've seen an ATM (banking station, not network pipe) crash, it was running OS/2. I can't say why, not having used it, but it seems to be pretty reliable in its role doing bank transactions & verification all day.
You're right. I recently rebooted my usually-running-Linux machine to its old Warp4 partition a couple days ago. A bit of nostalgia hit me as I realized that the WPS is still a very nice interface, far more consistent than any version of Windows I've seen.
MPlayer:
1) contains GPL'ed code.
2) Says they have a license that doesn't allow binary distribution. At no point is that license documented anywhere, nor is it listed on which files it applies to.
3) MPlayer has beefs with _anyone_ distributing binary packages, including distributions, such as Mandrake and Debian. No wonder I didn't know they existed.
Primarily it seems that their beef is with having to support other people's compiles. Of course, they are perfectly allowed to selectively apply support, and to even put restrictions on re-distribution of the code that they wrote. Of course, that does mean that they will need to specifically _list_ the restricted code, which they haven't done.
Personally, I think MPlayer is just bitching because they are getting newbie questions on the mailing list. I think they've got a crap architecture (since it requires compile-time selection of platform). I also think that it would be very nice for someone to take the code, replace the non-GPL bits, and allow people to get on with their lives.
Jason Pollock
From the MPlayer home page, it seems the MPlayer authors are mostly concerned about WarpVision stealing credit. They make a good case for that having happened.
:-).
Their claims about license violations seems confused at best. They claim MPlayer is released under its own license, but I found no such license in the source code for MPlayer 0.5. The closest I found is the following quote in the documentation:
MPlayer would be distributable under the terms of the
GNU GPL, but distributing binary packages is forbidden
Of course, the GPL forbids imposing such conditions on redistribution, so one must interpret this as saying that MPlayer is not distributable under the GPL, and since there is no other license supplied, must one understand MPlayer is not distributable at all?
Additionally, MPlayer uses code that is under the GPL, notably the MGA video drivers and some of the monitor frequency synchronization drivers. Thus either MPlayer is GPL or MPlayer violates the GPL or copyright laws.
Given MPlayer's licensing confusion, I'm not surprised WarpVision treated it as GPL. IMHO, that's the most reasonable interpretation that can be made of the situation. Regardless of licensing, of course, WarpVision should have more accurately and prominently advertised the debt it owed to MPlayer.
By the way, the vitriolic and childish attitude of the MPlayer author on this issue is yet another reminder of why it's a good idea to only use and contribute to really free software (which MPlayer apparently isn't)... I would hate to subject my use of a piece of software to the whims of such an apparently confused and aggressive person. And of course, I would hate to have such a person use code I wrote to impose their whims on others, which is why I use the GPL
The last thing you want will be your bank replacing your local (OS/2 operated) ATM with one that uses NT/W2K.
BSOD while trying to get my cash........no way!!!
BTW, eCS is much easier to install now. You might want to give it a shot.
But I agree, Slashdotters should have much more respect for OS/2.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
"There's a difference. When you use the handicapped space in the parking lot you don't steal it, do you? No. You perform a moving violation."
You couldn't be more wrong. Stealing the space is exactly what you are doing. For the time you occupy it when someone who really needs it you are stealing it from them.
"Ask Microsoft. Billy Gates started this whole IP crap with his "open letter" about people "stealing" his crappy BASIC compiler."
This is a perfect example of how truly misinformed you are. Do you really think the first IP laws were only passed in the 1980's ? Do you really think Bill Gates had that much power back then. I'm not a big fan of history, but in this case a little knowledge would go a long way to helping you see how truly absurd your statements are.
"Remember that next time you support IP. You're telling the goverment you are only worth $30 to them, as far as I see it. The US couldn't even pay off their debt at that rate!"
I didn't "support" IP, I merely stated that such a thing exists. I never indicated whether I liked the way things are, only that they are in fact that way. And you might want to take a look around you
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
The mplayer developers have HUGE social problems.
They are probably the most arrogant people I have ever had the displeasure of encountering. Not even the infamous djb (qmail) or tdr (openbsd) is anywhere as arrogant and insulting as this group of developers. I was really suprised, I didnt think anyone could top djb.
Just read their mailing list -- they attach headers to all mails relayed through the list telling everyone to "RTFM", and take great pleasure in treating everyone as idiots, even more pleasure in insulting them.
And the mplayer config script has a huge wild-eyed rant about redhat, if you dare to compile it with gcc 2.96 (even one known and proven to work perfectly fine, eg 2.96-85)
Oddly enough, I have experienced almost identical attitude from other hungarians. What IS it about that freaking country that makes everyone a flaming asshole?
Copyright generally forbids you to make other than "fair use" copies of another's artistic work. The GPL provides far more than fair use rights upon acceptance of the license, but those rights exist only when one complies with the license.
If copyright did not exist, you could ignore the GPL, and do what you would with code that came into your hands. While the result might be a world consistent with more of an LGPL or BSD style license, permitting secret (if not proprietary) extentions to free code, it would mean that distributed modifications to GPL code would not have to have accompanying source.
I don't think that would please RMS.
You could've hired me.
Quite frankly, I find nothing wrong with Slashdot. What I think is wrong with Slashdot is a userbase that not only doesn't understand how Slashdot works, but can't be bothered to understand it before they run around screaming about how "bad" Slashdot is. Pity, really.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.