Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FSF Threatens GPL Lawsuit

Posted by timothy on from the tlas-with-tlas dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Dan Gillmor of the San Jose Mercury News reports that OpenTV is violating the GNU General Public License. He notes that the Free Software Foundation is threatening to file a lawsuit in the case. If you haven't become an associate member of the FSF yet, now would be a good time!" Note that Gillmor is reporting the FSF's claim of violation, not making it himself.

5 of 426 comments (clear)

  1. Umm, and by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since nobody ever reads the article around here, i want to get this one paragraph out in the open and up at the top as quickly as possible, in hopes it will keep some stupid flamers from making stupid posts:

    OpenTV's intellectual property lawyer, Scott Doyle, says there's been missed communications on both sides but that the company has no intention of violating any legal agreements. He says the company plans to post the code in question online. :shrugs:. I've never even heard of OpenTV

  2. Is the GPL forcing? No! by termos · · Score: 5, Informative

    To quote the article at siliconvalley.com: Some people I respect say the GPL is a bad idea, period. They say it's too restrictive of programmers' rights, in the sense of forcing them to open what they've done to the world.

    This is completly wrong! It does not restrict the right of programmers - it's more the opposite, it gives programmers the right to view technology and learn from it, and even more importantly - they don't have to reinvent the wheel every time. What is this with forcing them to open what they have done to the world? It is not forcing anyone, it is just a license which the programmer choose to distribute his software under, or he choose not to, I can't see how that is forcing anything on anyone.

    --
    Note to self: get smarter troll to guard door.
  3. Subtle but important correction by sacrilicious · · Score: 5, Informative
    [The GPL] gives users of GPL-licensed software the right to see the source code, or programming instructions, of the software and to make modifications. But there's a string attached: If you create software that is derived from software previously licensed under the GPL, you must release what you've written under the same license.

    AFAIK you only have to release the source code to your software if you release the binaries. This may seem like a pedantic point, but in fact it makes a profound difference for any business that wants to go the "service bureau" route. Suppose your business consists of processing digital image files that customers submit. If the software that does this is built from GPL'd components, you nevertheless do *not* need to release the source code as long as it runs only on your servers. If instead you release a consumer version of the software, that is the point at which you must release the source as well.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  4. Re:This really is getting old ... by portnoy · · Score: 5, Informative
    This is another example of a company that is willing to cooperate, but has had a few snags in their plans. They've said they're going to post the code online (which they don't have to do) so lets see if they do.
    Indeed. A quick google search of "opentv gpl" finds that developers have been requesting the source code since March of 2001, to no avail. At some point, it begins to look less and less like a misunderstanding and more and more like a willful violation.
  5. source has been released by yanowitz · · Score: 5, Informative

    sdk is here.


    freetv has the announcement.

    Intriguingly, the postlink sources have a makefile for linux even though OpenTV doesn't officially support linux. Hopefully they'll release their toolchain for linux RSN.