Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NeoNapster's NeoAudio Rips Off CDex

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the gpl-violations-are-not-nice dept.

mydoghasworms writes "There's an interesting thing going down at CDex. Apparently the CDex application has been ripped off by NeoNapster, replacing the logo and adding some spyware and adware. (For those not in the know, CDex is a very nice, very easy-to-use GPL (as in Open Source) Audio CD Ripper). The user comments at download.com make for a very entertaining read."

8 of 481 comments (clear)

  1. since it is under the GPL by subgeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    does this mean that we can get all of the source for the spyware and adware? that could make for some fun. or at least it would take less time to disable it.

    --
    you probably shouldn't have read this.
  2. Sounds about right.... by sbeast702 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    .. Isn't that the way all the big boys started? MS stealing from Apple, AOL from Compuserve, etc...

  3. Notify CNet by duplicate-nickname · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Tell CNet Downloads to stop hosting this application as it is violating the original license.

    Their feedback URL is http://download.com.com/1200-20-750060.html?tag=su bnav

    --

    ÕÕ

  4. Copyrights... by phraktyl · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I contacted Richard M. Stallman about this issue, but unfortunately I can not do much about it, except for the fact that they are removing/changing copyright strings which they should not.
    If they are changing or removing copyright strings, doesn't that mean there is a lot he can do about it?
    --
    Karma: Marginal (mostly due to the border around the website)
  5. Even if it WERE OK under the GPL... by m2pc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Taking someone else's creative work and claiming it as your own isn't very ethical to say the least... not to mention the fact that they added features that make the software *less* desirable to the end user and make the original author look bad if someone confuses the "stolen" software with the original. This is no different than knock-off imitations of major name brand retail products... Everyone usually gets hurt here: the end user gets poor quality product, the knock-off company gets a bad name or gets sued by the real company, and the real company gets hurt by the brand confusion and their reputation may be damaged by the inferior imitation products.

  6. Re:comes with the territory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You must have a very bizarre definition for the word "stealing"...

    Stop that man! He's stealing your sandwich!

    No, I'm giving him the sandwich.

    But you aren't mandating how he can use the sandwich, so he is stealing it!

    Go away you gnazi.

  7. Am I the only one... by stubear · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...who see the irony in this? Is this the very same group stating publicly that they don't care about artists copyrights and violate them regularly? Sucks when it happens to you huh? Perhaps you'll learn from this and grow-up? Nah...this is Slashdot afterall.

  8. Can't one change copyright? by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I understand that the reason of the icompatibility between GPL and BSD with ad clause code is because (old) BSD forces you to mark the copyright of Berkeley regents.
    I understand that GPL doesn't involve copyright strings. The reason is that if you take small pieces of code from 100 GPL projects, it's uncomfortable to include 100 notices of copyright.

    Am I wrong? Must (legally) the author that copies bits of GPL code include the copyright of the previous authors?

    I thought it was just a thing of manners and reputation, not legal duty.

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu