Justin Frankel Resigns From Nullsoft

queue the llama noises by sweeney37 · 2003-06-04 05:00 · Score: 5, Funny

AOL, it really whips Frankel's ass.

Mike

Re:queue the llama noises by rmarll · 2003-06-04 05:03 · Score: 3, Funny

What a waste. :-P
Re:queue the llama noises by dimator · 2003-06-04 05:57 · Score: 2, Interesting

Hey, he made his money... Now he's free to do what he pleases, for the rest of his life.

--
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
Re:queue the llama noises by Snork+Asaurus · 2003-06-04 06:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

LOL. I wonder if Justin gets to keep the llama.
For many years, I have been impressed with the work of Nullsoft and their unique style and approach and I have always had the impression that Justin one of the key driving forces at Nullsoft. I fear that under AOL's corporate thumb Nullsoft (like Netscape) may be well on its way to becoming Null.
Good luck, Justin, and thanks for giving us Winamp.

--
Sigs are bad for your health.
Re:queue the llama noises by LloydSeve · 2003-06-04 07:26 · Score: 3, Informative

Justin Frankel's Website Here he talks about his wanting to resign from the company due to recent cencorship against his products.. It's not about contracts, etc.. it's just about the fact that he isn't allowed to express himself freely doing what he loves. Here is some more comments about his leaving...

Anything to do with Waste... by Daniel+Wood · 2003-06-04 05:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

One has to wonder whether this has anything to do with the WASTE fiasco.

Wonder? When he says, "The company controls what I do with my code [in the past, it seemed I had freedom, but it turns out all of that was not really the case--rather, I was somehow avoiding the control illicitly (for 4 years)]," it becomes rather clear as to exactly what he is talking about.

This has everything to do with WASTE and any other projects that AOL canned.

Re:Anything to do with Waste... by rzbx · 2003-06-04 05:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

It has to do with more than just WASTE. He stated that the company controls what he does and that coding is a form of free expression to him. He basically doesn't want the company to control his free expression. WASTE is just one example.

--
Question everything.
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by Xerithane · 2003-06-04 05:05 · Score: 5, Interesting

This has everything to do with WASTE and any other projects that AOL canned.

I think it has everything to do with the lack of independance of coding, not WASTE or any other particular project. Those are just symptoms of the problem.

I've worked for companies before that have draconian contracts, "Anything you think is our property! Hah!"

--
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by TopShelf · 2003-06-04 05:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

Frankly, I'm amazed the guy stayed under the AOL umbrella this long. When you read a quote like that, it's clearly coming from someone who doesn't fit within a corporate environment. His talents would be better served in a smaller outfit within which he has greater control...

--
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 05:56 · Score: 2, Funny

Don't for get the non-compete clause: "for the next 17 years you agree not to think on behalf of any other company".... guess that means you can only get a new job if it's in management.
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by Gloume · 2003-06-04 06:27 · Score: 3, Informative

Like Nullsoft?
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by miu · 2003-06-04 06:58 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've worked for companies before that have draconian contracts, "Anything you think is our property! Hah!"
I don't sign contracts like that. My current employer sends a gentle reminder every 6 months that I need to sign that contract, and every 6 months I say, "Not until the work for the company vs. work during personal time issue is corrected". They have not pressed it too hard because many of my co-workers have not signed it either.

--

[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by PalmKiller · 2003-06-04 08:03 · Score: 2, Interesting

I figure it was just the last straw, or perhaps he just cant handle the fact that he gave away his rights to do whatever he wanted with the company when he sold out to AOL.
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 08:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

Keep in mind that the guy is only 24. At ~19 he hit the jackpot with a "for fun" MP3 player -- a trivial app (see all the MP3 players on FreshMeat).

Had he not gotten extremely lucky, he'd probably be working as Junior Programmer on some accounting system, ready to be beat down for 'private-sector work' just like the rest of us. :P
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by Sacarino · 2003-06-04 09:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

Keep in mind that the guy is only 24. At ~19 he hit the jackpot with a "for fun" MP3 player -- a trivial app (see all the MP3 players on FreshMeat).

Alright, I'll bite.

Perhaps you weren't around when WinAMP was in it's infancy. I remember only one other player that even came CLOSE to the stability WinAMP provided. I even registered my copy with Nullsoft, back when it was shareware. It's not like you had "all the MP3 players on FreshMeat" to choose from. It was either WinAMP or it's crappy runner-up. Couple that with the fact that WinAMP was a) skinnable, b) had some badass graphical features, and c) impressed non-geeks. It also extended mp3 support with some attempts at backward compatability.

I know it's been a while, but computers used to be slow. WinAMP would play on a 95 box running on a 486/dx2. That's IMPRESSIVE, my friend. You couldn't do jack-shit else while it was playing or it'd skip, but the fact that it would play this fancy new MP3 format that only took a couple megs for a song was nice. It made people take notice. What did you do that ranks anywhere near that? I know that crap I did in Comp Sci & Eng didn't land me anything like the deal he made for himself. I don't think he got lucky at all, he saw a need and he wrote something that took care of said need.

--
-- El Sacarino tiene gusto de la chocha
Re:Anything to do with Waste... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · 2003-06-04 12:12 · Score: 3, Funny

Don't for get the non-compete clause: "for the next 17 years you agree not to think on behalf of any other company".... guess that means you can only get a new job if it's in management.

Or a job down at the Patent Office.

Not Yet... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 05:01 · Score: 2, Informative

He is thinking about resigning: he hasn't yet. And, yes, if he does, it will be because of the Waste thing, and the Gnutella thing, and probably a whole lot of other things. :)

Long Decline Anyway by kavachameleon · 2003-06-04 05:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

Nullsoft seems to have been in a decline for a long while now... who uses winamp 3 anyway? certainly no one I know. Most people either use WIMP, XMMS or an old version of Winamp. So are we really losing bigtime here?

Re:Long Decline Anyway by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 05:04 · Score: 2, Informative

Winamp 3 is dead, version 2.91 is the latest version. They really need to update their webpage so it defaults to the Winamp 2 area.
Re:Long Decline Anyway by kavachameleon · 2003-06-04 05:06 · Score: 3, Informative

WIMP=WMP=Windows Media Player. Kind of a derogatory term for it. :-) Hit up MS's site for more info if you need it.
Re:Long Decline Anyway by LPetrazickis · 2003-06-04 05:40 · Score: 2, Funny

I use Winamp3 because I like the new XML-based UI and multiple playlist functionality.

* a dustball rolls across the slash page

Uh, just thought that I should mention it.:)

--
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
Re:Long Decline Anyway by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 06:18 · Score: 2, Informative

There are two builds of Winamp, 2.0 and 3.0.
2.0 builds are based on the old version which nearly everyone uses with the old style interface and it's latest build is 2.91.
3.0 builds are based on a new style interface but can use the old style interface. The new style interface is similar to Sonique in that it can take any form ie. round, square or oblong etc. I'm sure there are other differences however I've not used the 3.0 builds so I wouldn't know. I've to many skins for the 2.0 builds to bother with the 3.0 version.
Check out deviant art's website for a visual idea of the difference.
Re:Long Decline Anyway by pacc · 2003-06-04 07:24 · Score: 4, Informative

Apart from skins in winamp 2.0 you should know that AOL has put it's mark on that too.

Since winamp 2.61 there are some support for "content management" for microsoft .wma files.
You should install winamp 2.60 copy the plugins/in_wm.dll file to replace the one shipped with winamp 2.91, otherwise you won't be able to convert your .wma files to wav using diskwriter.

Tip courtesy of apachez
Re:Long Decline Anyway by arkanes · 2003-06-04 07:34 · Score: 2, Informative

The 2 series is still being actively developed. 2.91 is the latest version of 2, not just a maintenance release. 3 is kind of dead in the water for exactly the reasion you mentioned (although Wasabi is a very cool idea).
Re:Long Decline Anyway by Jugalator · 2003-06-04 07:51 · Score: 2, Informative

Most people either use WIMP, XMMS or an old version of Winamp.

Yes, but those "old versions of Winamp" (the 2.x series) is still under development. It has had a lot of useful bugfixes and improvements, some pretty major. Take a look at the Winamp 2.9 release notes for example, to see what I'm talking about.

--
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!

That's the point... by shroudedmoon · 2003-06-04 05:01 · Score: 2, Redundant

I kinda thought it was a given it had to do with waste...

The company controls what I do with my code [in the past, it seemed I had freedom, but it turns out all of that was not really the case--rather, I was somehow avoiding the control illicitly (for 4 years)

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Justin Frankel by vasqzr · 2003-06-04 05:02 · Score: 3, Interesting

I remember talking to the guy on IRC years ago when he was working on his old 3D engine, Plush.

Time sure flies!

Re:Justin Frankel by vasqzr · 2003-06-04 05:17 · Score: 2, Informative

It's not offtopic. If you hadn't just gotten a computer in the last 2 years, and hung around channels like #c and #coders, you'd know what I'm talking about. He was one of the guys who helped write something cool, and they were bought up by a big company and thats almost like a dream come true.

I remember the conversations about WinAmp and Mp3's back in the mid 90's:

"I just compressed a Rob Zombie song down to 3mb, it took 25 minutes on my Pentium 166"

"Why the heck would you want to do that? It'd take a half hour to download it over my 56k modem!?"

"Well it's this cool format called MPEG Layer 3, and a bunch of us are trading music files. Anyone know where you can find some Pearl Jam?"
Re:Justin Frankel by VoiceOfRaisin · 2003-06-04 06:14 · Score: 2, Funny

sounds like you got into the scene late. i was trading mp2 files before mp3 came out. they were pretty damn good too. mp3 is maybe only 50% better or something.

Good riddance :P by coupland · 2003-06-04 05:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'm glad he's leaving, AOL doesn't need him anyway; after all they have lawyers. Let the lawyers write the code. I'm sure AOL 10.0 will rock the house.

On the other hand this unleashes a creative, boisterous, unwielding and stubborn geek on the world, perhaps even to join the ranks of all those amateur open source hacks. In the end you get AOL run by a squeeky-clean army of professional lawyers and another rogue hacker who acknowledges no ones authority to dictate what he contributes to their quasi-communist "community" of freedom fighters. Altogether I think both sides are getting exactly what they deserve. ;-)

Re:Good riddance :P by tyllwin · 2003-06-04 05:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

Ah, yes, but while at Nullsoft, he was (well, still is for the moment) getting handsomely paid to express himself through code. Open-source hacking may be better for the community, but it don't pay the bills.

One doesn't have to wonder... by Xerithane · 2003-06-04 05:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

He's leaving because he doesn't like the "We own everything you write" clause in his employment contract. I'm not sure what the WASTE fiasco is anyway. WASTE is something Nullsoft produced, as long as it's under the GPL (Yes.) he can quit and still work on it, and nobody can (legally) care.

He's probably just pissed that what he works on gets the "Copyright AOL/Time Warner" header on it, and understandably so.

--
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.

Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by Anti+Frozt · 2003-06-04 05:10 · Score: 5, Informative

IIRC, at the time that WASTE was developed, Nullsoft was owned by AOL/Time Warner. This would mean that anything created by employees of Nullsoft had to be cleared with AOL.
Therefore, it couldn't be produced under the GPL unless AOL said so. Most employment contracts specifically state that any thing or idea created, conceived, developed, etc. while employeed becomes property of the employeer (in this case, AOL/Time Warner)

--
In C++, friends can touch each others private parts.
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by tsetem · 2003-06-04 05:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

Just because he released it under the GPL doesn't necessarily mean it's legal. If all of the code he writes is owned by AOL, then AOL, as the copyright holder, must determine the license it's released under.

Don't know how serious this may be, but if AOL wanted to, they might be able to sue for loss of IP due to the dumpage of WASTE into the GPL realm. That's the real bitch when you write code for a company. Unless you beg & plead with the lawyers (or your managers) to give you a little freedom, they own your stuff.

And this leads right into non-compete clauses in your contract. Even thinking about the code you wrote for another company could be considered competing against your previous employer.
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by LostCluster · 2003-06-04 05:35 · Score: 4, Interesting

Therefore, it couldn't be produced under the GPL unless AOL said so.

This was discussed to death in the previous WASTE discussion. Justin, as an employee of AOL, tried to put WASTE under the GPL. AOL then came forward and said that Justin had no authority to do so.

However, just because an employee makes a deal outside of their authority doesn't automatically reverse the deal. The test is whether the other party to the deal in good faith believed that the employee had the authority, or should have known that something was amiss. That's a tough question and would likely take a judge to answer completely...
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by 2logic · 2003-06-04 05:41 · Score: 5, Insightful

If it could only be that simple...
You have to remember that NullSoft is a subsidary of AOL Time Warner. Which probably means that Justin is under contract from Nullsoft and not AOL.
He probably has pretty much all the control over what he can do with what Nullsoft creates. The problem is probably in the contract that binds Nullsoft to AOL. I think that indirectly, Justin's code is owned by AOL, but since Nullsoft is an entity of its own, it can do many things on its own: creating software, releasing code, being a pain for AOL, etc... BUT only to some extent, because Nullsoft is a subsidary of (or controlled by) AOL.
So it's probably not just a matter of a simple contract between an employer and its employees... It goes deeper than that I'm afraid.

--
// TODO
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by harlows_monkeys · 2003-06-04 05:45 · Score: 2, Informative

The test is whether the other party to the deal in good faith believed that the employee had the authority, or should have known that something was amiss
It's obvious upon examing the source that something is amiss: the source includes RSA code that is under a license that is NOT compatible with the GPL. That should make people suspicious about the legitimacy of the release.
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by pc486 · 2003-06-04 06:14 · Score: 4, Interesting

Last I checked, RSA is in the public domain. Even if WASTE used stolen/imporperly licensed code, opensource coders could simply replace it with a GPL compatible version.
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by randombit · 2003-06-04 08:20 · Score: 2, Interesting

as long as it's under the GPL

Actually, though, RSAREF (which WASTE uses) is under a license that is (very) incompatable with the GPL. Nothing stopping you from distributing the source (assuming you don't mind AOL possibly coming after you), but no binaries.

And, oh, my. Just finished reading the last clasues of the RSAREF license. Looks like WASTE violates those, meaning WASTE isn't legal anyway (at least until/unless someone re-writes it w/o RSAREF).
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by gmhowell · 2003-06-04 09:08 · Score: 3, Informative

Let me add a bit to your lexicon:

apparent authority
ostensible authority

The fact that neither of these terms have shown up in the discussion thus far indicate how little business training most slashbots have. See, sometimes, there's value to an MBA. If nothing else, we're more conversent with lawyer-ese than most programmers.

(And in case you were wondering what all this means, basically, anyone who downloaded the software might have it free and clear. AOL, via Nullsoft, via authority of Justin, may have to abide by the original terms, GPL.)

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... by gmhowell · 2003-06-04 09:48 · Score: 2, Informative

I didn't realize you were an MBA... I could definitely use some of your help if you are interested.

You've got email and AIM. Drop me a line.

The situation is even more damning than you imply. The trick is that AOL didn't have to give any authority ot Null and/or Justin in the first place. Justin's job title was CEO of Nullsoft. The software appeared on Nullsoft's site, probably placed there by Justin himself. Having that job title makes it *look* like things were legit on his end. Anyone who dl'ed that software probably thought that it was on the up and up.

Of course, there are tons of 'ifs'. The first is that everyone dl'ing that software knew that nullsoft releases had been pulled in the past, so it's possible that this one would be as well. There's the RSAREF question, but if I remember the GPL correctly, the non-offending portions of code are still a-okay. There's also whether or not a judge would deem that the GPL is a legit contract. In MD and VA, it should be (shrinkwrap licenses are law, even if they haven't yet appeared in court). Also, there's little or no consideration. In any contractual arrangement, each party has to give a little to get a little. Except for the previously pulled Nullsoft software, none of these issues has anything to do with the legitimacy of Justin offering the code for download.

This is one of the reasons companies have PO systems. Someone with real authority has to okay a purchase. In my company, there's only two signatures that count without another signature. All contracted employees agree to personally indemnify the company against contracts they entered into that the company didn't okay. Any non-contracted employee knows better, and would be fired for signing another other than a UPS delivery. Even in the former case, we are not really safe. Let's say some doctor ordered a new fangled blood-widget tester for $10,000. The company would *still* have to pay for it (most likely). The only thing the contract does is make clear that we can take it out of the employee's (doctor's) ass. It doesn't change the fact that Weyland Yutani entered into what they thought was a legitimate agreement.

Of course, there's one more thing (isn't there always?) in that even apparant authority doesn't work with stolen goods. Let's say Weyland sold us a stolen blood-widget machine. Even though we acted in good faith, we can't keep the stolen goods. But, we can go after Weyland instead of the employee. This does bear on the Justin/AOL/Nullsoft issue, just because of the weirdness of computer code, legally speaking. If AOL/Nullsoft is working on some code to sell that is similar to WASTE, they could make the argument that Justin cost them sales, and perhaps retract the code. But, if they have no plans to do anything with the code (given what has happened with earlier Justin projects, I'd argue this is more likely) and just wants to sit on it, or avoid some legal exposure, they've got a weaker case.

Sadly, there is no 'trumping' action in any of this. Were it to end up in court, some judge would juggle all these myriad legal doctrines, and decide which weighs the most today and in this case. Honestly, AOL should have fired him last time around if they are truly concerned about it.

I've got no answer to the situation. I just thought I'd edumacate some folks. Perhaps if they understood some of these things, they'd know why their bosses are 'such dickheads'.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon

Suprisingly he lasted this long by brent_linux · 2003-06-04 05:03 · Score: 5, Interesting

When AOL bought out Nullsoft, I was sure he would leave. When they took down the gnutella stuff, I was sure he would leave. When they stopped the aimster stuff, I was sure he would leave.

I didn't really have him pegged as a corporate kinda guy from the start. I am really suprised that he could take it this long before he left. Corps are often to stifling to creativity.

Why don't they ever ask politely? by zptdooda · 2003-06-04 05:04 · Score: 5, Funny

``If you downloaded or otherwise obtained a copy of the software, you ... must destroy any and all copies of the software, including by deleting it from your computer''

Other valid means are:
- just throw the whole computer out. That way we'll have covered all the bases for future potential license violations
- hmm can't think of anymore (well this list sure fizzled out fast)

``Any license that you may believe you acquired with the software is void, revoked and terminated.''

Well Schrodinger's license is definitely dead then. I never downloaded it but now I'm wondered if I got one through some quantum license-tunnelling effect.

I wonder about the order of voiding, revoking, and terminating? Was it in series or in parallel? Sounds like the license got taken out back and worked over by the three of them at once.

--
Esteem isn't a zero sum game

Slashdot won't like this but... by FreeLinux · 2003-06-04 05:05 · Score: 2, Interesting

I guess I didn't embrace the dot bomb generation or something. I can't generate any feeling of respect for a "company executive" that runs a weblog and moans about corporate issues publicly. It just isn't professional.

I'm sure that the Slash crowd won't like this opinion but it's mine. Flame on.

Re:Slashdot won't like this but... by Planesdragon · 2003-06-04 05:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

I guess I didn't embrace the dot bomb generation or something. I can't generate any feeling of respect for a "company executive" that runs a weblog and moans about corporate issues publicly. It just isn't professional.

Executives don't write software.

He is, at worst, a software programmer who manages a division. In the software world--especially the free software world--keeping a weblog and being honest in it have come to be hallmarks of a professional.
Re:Slashdot won't like this but... by Meat+Blaster · 2003-06-04 05:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

I can't imagine that he was being paid that badly, either. Most people would kill to get bought out by AOL (or Microsoft for that matter), so what's wrong with taking the money and leaving it to the college students to write the piracy apps?
When you can afford most of the things you want, why is WASTE so important?
Re:Slashdot won't like this but... by HBI · 2003-06-04 05:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

True. When we accept the lowest common denominator we get it in spades. I wouldn't blame Mr. Frankel, i'd blame the whole generation for it.

The lack of decorum today is pretty appalling. Maybe someday people will wake up and say 'we liked it the old way'. Not likely anytime soon though.

--
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Re:Slashdot won't like this but... by SubtleNuance · 2003-06-04 05:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

it just isn't professional.

You know what, im sick of this 'unprofessional' trash. "Professional" is inhuman. Usually, any act of honesty is described as 'unprofessional' Im tired of my personal relations being filtered through the Blanket-of-Commerce that requires people to be a cog or a tool.

I could care less that a person was 'unprofessional' -- because a person's character is not defined by how well he conforms to his employers view of how best to achieve profit.

Justin has grown tired of being a wage-slave -- so have I.. I just dont have the resources to buy life back from my Corporate Masters just yet...
Re:Slashdot won't like this but... by LWATCDR · 2003-06-04 06:25 · Score: 3, Insightful

WASTE is not a Piracy app. A program that lets you search for files and copy them is not a piracy app! If so then Windows and Linux are piracy app. I can do a seach on a network drive and then copy it to a disk. What what about FTP? I guess FTP servers and clients are also piracy apps. Good lord man. He said that AOL used it in house to do secure file transfres from on office to another! WASTE is a secure way to transmit data from one computer to another in a small network of users.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Slashdot won't like this but... by falsified · 2003-06-04 12:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

This is gonna sound like a troll or something, but really, what has AOL done to stifle its subprojects? Yeah, AOL did shut down Gnutella. That's probably because AOL is in the music/movie business (the TW of AOLTW). So, while that's a shame, it's also somewhat expected. WASTE was pulled for the same reasons. AOL doesn't wanna shoot itself in the foot. For what it's worth, Nullsoft really DOES remain quite independent of the nice clean scrubbed creppy AOL crap. Yes, you get AOL icons when you install Winamp3, but that's the only AOL fingerprint I see.
$86 million for a free (as in beer) media player is more of a charity than anything else.
No, you will not have the freedom to write p2p programs that are invariably used for piracy if your boss runs movie studios and record labels. This is somehow a surprise?

--
HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.

'99 by Mattygfunk1 · 2003-06-04 05:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

Despite the new corporate ownership, Nullsoft's team of programmers managed to maintain a freestyle hacker culture.

The dream is still alive people. Demand your fair dues.

__
Cheap web hosting Dragon Action Figures

justin's blog ... probably gonna be slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 05:05 · Score: 3, Informative

June 2 2003 @ 10:03pm For me, coding is a form of self-expression. It's probably the form I'm most effective at. Everything I code is arguably owned by the company. The company controls what I do with my code [in the past, it seemed I had freedom, but it turns out all of that was not really the case--rather, I was somehow avoiding the control illicitly (for 4 years)] The company controls the most effective means of self-expression I have. This is unacceptable to me as an individual, therefore I must leav. I don't know when it will be, but I'm not going to last much longer. I have nothing but respect for the company--I've just come to realize that it is time to do something different. May 31 2003 @ 3:00pm or so Moving my .plan here. Finger has been firewalled on genghis for weeks since the (lame) network rebuild, so it's hosed. The last few days have been, erm, interesting, it will be, erm, interesting to see how they end up panning out. But I'm feeling pretty good, though like usual feeling misunderstood. I'll try to clear it up next week. At Ian's suggestion been listening to Slint a bit. Good shit. So funny that one of the guys from Slint is now in Zwan, and Zwan sucks so hard. Well, they rule as musicians, but their songs suck. I don't want to listen to christian rock. Winamp 2.92 will have CD ripping support, with support for OGG. OGG VBR at 0.0 sounds pretty decent, listenable, at like 60kbps. I'm pretty impressed with it. Yesterday driving home I listened to Lamb - Zero a couple times. Such a good song. So simple. Mmmm.

Yes, it was WASTE by xcomputer_man · 2003-06-04 05:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

Whereas this seems to be a long time coming, the WASTE issue clearly seems to be the reason behind this:

The company controls what I do with my code [in the past, it seemed I had
freedom, but it turns out all of that was not really the case--rather, I
was somehow avoiding the control illicitly (for 4 years)]

I completely support him here...he sees code as a form of expression, and being censored is one of the worst things you can get paid to do.

Besides, I guess we have an answer to the question of whether Nullsoft is a legal entity free from the tentacles of AOL or not ... he's only been lucky so far!

--
Am I a hipster-doofus?

He hasn't resigned... by johnhennessy · 2003-06-04 05:06 · Score: 5, Informative

Read the article. It says that he can't stick the current situation much longer, but at no point does he say that he has resigned.

--
[ Monday is a terrible way to spend one seventh of your life. ]

About time... by Eyston · 2003-06-04 05:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

I don't understand why its taken 4 years for this to happen. The guy obviously is not suited for corporate coding and when it comes to money I would think he's pretty well off. Having the legal backing of a big corporation might be nice but not if all they do is pull your code to avoid doing anything.

-Eyston

Question about article by tkrotchko · 2003-06-04 05:08 · Score: 4, Interesting

In the article, it claims Nullsoft is saying there is no valid license for WASTE, yet it looked to me as if WASTE was released under GPL.

I wonder if the GPL license is valid at this point for WASTE? Or did Justin not have the rights to release it under GPL?

--
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you

Re:Question about article by AlbanySux · 2003-06-04 05:45 · Score: 3, Insightful

You are in no position to argue anything. You do not have any relevent facts. For all you know there is a big clause in his contract that says all releases must be cleared with AOL or all releases must be closed source or any number of things that we just don't know about. So, its a bad idea to make anykind of assumtion about what he can and cannot do.

Looks like WASTE is.. by EinarH · 2003-06-04 05:08 · Score: 5, Informative

still available for download, including source, over at deviantart.com...

Strange they haven't pulled it off the web.

Disclaimer:
This post is of course provided as "AS IS". And I do NOT encourage any copyright enfringement.

--

Melius mori in libertate quam vivere in servitute.

Most Winamp coders left already by Skuto · 2003-06-04 05:08 · Score: 5, Interesting

Most of the really good Winamp coders left already. The guy that wrote almost all the core plugins, Peter Pawlowksi, quit because he didn't like Winamp 3 design and thought it was a dead end. Because AOL still owns his code, some of the plugins are 'dead' now, and the code can't be used any more. Bummer.

He wrote his own player instead, which is, eh, quite different from Winamp, Foobar2000.

Anyway, Frankel has little to complain about. Nullsoft was bought out for almost 86M$. For that much money, he'll never have to code, err, express himself ever again.

Re:Most Winamp coders left already by yppiz · 2003-06-04 05:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Anyway, Frankel has little to complain about. Nullsoft was bought out for almost 86M$. For that much money, he'll never have to code, err, express himself ever again.

The compelling desire to express yourself doesn't always end when you make money.

The Nullsoft folks sound like they made money because they had the drive to express themselves in a heartfelt way - resulting in compelling, well written applications.

--Pat / zippy@cs.brandeis.edu

Good for him by Arbogast_II · 2003-06-04 05:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

It is always a pleasure to see a person who realizes a good life is more important than money!

--

HenryJamesFeltus.com

Re:Good for him by RealityMogul · 2003-06-04 05:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

Spoken like somebody that makes enough money to have a good life.
Re:Good for him by ichimunki · 2003-06-04 05:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

You're being funny, right? I mean, otherwise how do you explain selling your company to AOL in the first place? And do you really think he's risking going hungry here? Somehow I think someone who's had the opportunity to sell their company to AOL has more money in hand than most of us will earn in a lifetime (unless, of course, he's squandered it or invested carelessly in the last four years).

--
I do not have a signature

Non-Free? by obfuscated · 2003-06-04 05:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

Maybe AOL's mgmt wanted to shift Winamp to a pay for or adware product.

I never liked it when they proudly boasted that there were NO ADS! and it was FREE!

--

-- dK ... Narf Poit!

iTunes for windows anybody??? by snuffdiddy23 · 2003-06-04 05:10 · Score: 5, Interesting

i am keeping my fingers cross that he can continue with his work. apple is looking for a coder for the iTunes Music store for windows, Justin Frankel would be perfect. only to switch him over to the darkside now.

A good thing, i think. by Naikrovek · 2003-06-04 05:10 · Score: 2

welcome to the very large group of unemployed folks, Justin. ;)

I think this is a great thing, other than the obvious distaste you have in your mouth right now from leaving a job. Resigning always sucks, even when it sucks a lot less than not resigning.

But I belive you can do some more cool shit now without worrying about getting your work eliminated, and I think your stuff has made the world a better place. (I don't however, believe that demanding the right to distribute other people's property is a good thing, music swappers.) gnutella is a good thing though, and waste was (is?) too.

keep using that noggin you got and keep writing more cool software. you'll be happy again (or happier) in no time.

Re:Hmm... by Horny+Smurf · 2003-06-04 05:11 · Score: 4, Funny

fortunately, you can use fake information to sign up.

unfortunately, they use fake information when writing stories.

About time! by thdexter · 2003-06-04 05:11 · Score: 3, Interesting

Really, I figured he would've quit right the second that AOLTW bought Nullsoft, as we've seen happen with countless other small good companies when bought by AOLTW or Microsoft. Winamp 2.92 (2.x branch is still maturing--though probably not after this) is super. Anyway, I'm sure that a talented developer such as himself can get a job most anywhere, or even just work like Linus does at some place that gives him money while he essentially independently develops kickass software.

--
I'm on a road shaped like a figure eight; I'm going nowhere but I'm guaranteed to be late.

Yeah, but... by kotj.mf · 2003-06-04 05:13 · Score: 5, Informative

The previous entry in his blog is even more interesting:

Winamp 2.92 will have CD ripping support, with support for OGG. OGG VBR at 0.0 sounds pretty decent, listenable, at like 60kbps. I'm pretty impressed with it.

'bout damn time. Hopefully his leaving won't change Nullsoft's plans to provide real OGG support. I still can't get it to pick up very low bitrate HTTP Vorbis streams via a straight .m3u ala XMMS.

--
hang brain.

Re:Yeah, but... by pebs · 2003-06-04 05:41 · Score: 5, Informative

WinAmp 2.92? I'm using WinAmp 3.0c -- am I in the future or something?

No, WinAmp 2.92 is newer than the current Winamp 3 release. Winamp 3 was more of an experiment that pretty much failed and they are scrapping it for the most part. They are taking some of the Winamp 3 features and adding them to 2. This new version is tentatively going to be called Winamp 5 (2 + 3), and to be released end of summer 2003. This is what I read on the message boards a while ago, their plans may have changed.

I'm kinda pissed that Winamp 3 for Linux pretty much disappeared. The alpha version, though really buggy, sounded much better than XMMS. Hopefully they will release a Linux player some time in the future, but I don't see it happening.

--
#!/

Big Duh. by suntse · 2003-06-04 05:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

And no, I don't mean "big duh" as to why he's leaving. I mean "big duh" to "gee, the company really DOES own my code, after all?"

Working as a programmer is very, very simple. You work for a company. That company *pays* you to make things. The company owns the things you make.

This isn't even a case of AOL saying it owns something he made and distributed on his spare time. He wrote code and put it up for distribution on a web site owned by his employer, using a brand owned by his employer.

Very simple rule: if you don't want your employer to control your code, don't write the code at work and distribute it via work. If your employer has a ridiculous clause saying they own everything you write in your spare time as well, then either don't write anything for yourself, or find a new job.

/. Mishap again by MmmmJoel · 2003-06-04 05:15 · Score: 5, Informative

Justin has not resigned as /. has prematurely concluded. The NY Times article only says he plans to, which we could all come to the same conclusion by reading the blog. There is no additional information in the NY Times article and both parties have declined to comment. There is no indication that the NY Times had access to anything further than what we already knew.

Yes, it is probably inevitable, but this writeup is wrong as so many others have because some /. rogue reads something, draws a different conclusion, and the /. editors don't pick up on it.

Easy to do when you're rich by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 05:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

Even if you assume his $86M was in options, the guy has still got to be worth $20M worst case.

So, there was no courage involved here as far as I can see.

Not much of a surprise... by Blic · 2003-06-04 05:19 · Score: 5, Interesting

It'd be curious to find out exactly what happened at Nullsoft. I mean, things seemed good for a while after the acquisition. Then it seems like they brought in a lot of new people and came out with the bloated beast that is WinAmp 3. How much involvement did Justin have in that fiasco? Then recently they brought out WinAmp 2.9X which sort of undercut WinAmp 3, but in a good way. Gnutella, and then WASTE which was such a perfect name for the program, hehe, as long as you've read Pynchon's The Crying of Lot 49. Well, as long as Justin diversified and didn't have all his money tied up in AOL stock he's probably doing pretty well and shouldn't have to put up with the headaches if he doesn't want to.

Re:I cannot beleive that he is too upset... by jat850 · 2003-06-04 05:19 · Score: 2, Informative

Said person reads their employment contract very carefully, and if they are suspicious of any such clauses, they either a) renegotiate the contract or b) don't work for that employer.

Can't be too careful with things like that nowadays.

--
the blood has stopped pumping, and he's left to decay
the me that you know is now made up of wires

Its a job. by Bluelive · 2003-06-04 05:20 · Score: 2, Informative

Your getting paid to write software, then they own that and can kill it if they like to do so. Its called a job and it sucks :)

Re:Its a job. by LynchMan · 2003-06-04 05:28 · Score: 2, Informative

So True. I have been on many a project that I have invested years of work, research, coding, blood, sweat, and tears on only to have it cancelled at some point. Yeah it sucks, but I still have a job. Do I go an get 'revenge' and leak the source. No.

If you were being paid, it belongs to the company and it is up to them what to do with it, not you. You can ask if they will open soure it, but it is up to them. I cannot imagine how one would keep their job if they did this - not to mentioned being attacked by the former company's legal squad.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for open source and GPL, but be honest about it, not vengeful.

P2P time, baby by drgroove · 2003-06-04 05:23 · Score: 2, Funny

Justin first releases Gnutella on his/AOL's site, then WASTE... now that he's no longer going to be working under AOL's thumb, I wonder what kind of P2P file swapping/sharing/pirating marvels he'll unleash upon the world? Maybe the RIAA should just go ahead and begin their lawsuit now...

Your code is your kids... by malakai · 2003-06-04 05:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

can't imagine that he was being paid that badly, either. Most people would kill to get bought out by AOL (or Microsoft for that matter), so what's wrong with taking the money and leaving it to the college students to write the piracy apps?

seriously. Money is great, I like money, it pays the rent and lets me do what i want half the year. But if all I did was "nothing" I would not be happy. Coding makes me happy. I'm sure coding a app like WASTE for Justin made him happy.

I feel there are at minimum two kind of coders out there right now. Type A joined the ranks because they want to make money. They could have easily done something else. Most were drawn into the big bright light of the Internet boom. They want to code from 9 to 5pm, and then be done. They expect to move into mangement at some point, and consider coding a menial task that can be pushed down the ranks.

Type X started coding because someting intially didn't do what they wanted it to do. This led to coding addiction, consuming massive amounts of dry reading material, working crazy hours, but always coming back to the keyboard like the crack head to his pipe. The irony is, in present economy, Type X makes the money, and the Type A is trying to learn another skill, move to project management, go back to school and get a degress in business...etc..etc.

When you can afford most of the things you want, why is WASTE so important?

It's his baby. You'll understand if you ever code a baby of your own.

Having said all this, I think I would have fought it out until they fired me. but not knowing his legal/contractual situation resigning may be his best bet.

-malakai

--
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage

Re:Your code is your kids... by malakai · 2003-06-04 06:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

There is indeed a middle-ground which involves having other hobbies at home, raising a family, brewing beer, etc., that is indeed a profitable, enjoyable life

I prefix my statment with: "I feel there are at a minimum two kind of coders out there right now".
And then choose variable A and variable X, leaving a lot of variables in between.

I simply feel it's an upside down bell curve. I'm not a statistician, I could be wrong, but this is my instinct from my experiences.

Yes i've met succesfull, happy coders that have a family and balance/manage time effectively, but none of them are lead coders on anything. And they are rare.

Burnout is a fact we all live with. It's one morning away. Its solvable though, taking minimum 2 months vacation each year helps. Or spending half the year working on light, simple, few days at the most projects.

In the end though, you are an addict or you are not. If you are not an addict, then you can draw distinctions between Type A and (Type B to Type W).

-malakai

--
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage

Why did this take so long? by buckminster · 2003-06-04 05:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

Frankel reportedly sold Nullsoft to AOL for $86 million. Seems like $86 million would go an awful long way towards starting a new company and doing whatever he damn well pleases. Why does Frankel need AOL? They certainly don't seem to be providing him any resources or support. Unless you count the "support" of their legal department.

Re:Why did this take so long? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 05:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

Was that $86 million in Cash or AOL shares? If it was in cash, he's sitting pretty. If it was in AOL shares, he'll probally need a new job and fast.

Last thing we need, another unemployed programmer on the market. Quit in this economy?! The fool.

What did he expect? by Jack+Comics · 2003-06-04 05:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

Honestly, what did the guy expect? You only own your own work when you either do it and provide it on your own time and space, or if you own your own company. When you work for a company, and make something on company time and put it up using company resources, guess what? It's owned by the company. If they like it, it stays up. If they don't, it comes down, as was the case with WASTE. You have very little or no say in the matter once you finished creating it.

Mouthing off in his blog doesn't help matters either. Honestly, to me this just displays immaturity. Not a good thing, not a bad thing either. Just stating it as I see it. He's still young, he'll probably eventually mature and realize the world works on different terms than his, and not vice versa. It would be naive and immature otherwise, and naivety and immaturity is what Justin Frankel has displayed in spades the past few weeks. Welcome to the real world, it's called "growing up and accepting responsibility."

--
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." - Oscar Wilde

Re:Waste Reborn? by snuffdiddy23 · 2003-06-04 05:36 · Score: 2, Informative

An unauthorized copy of Nullsoft's copyrighted software was briefly posted on this website on or about Wednesday May 28, 2003. The software was identified as "WASTE" (the "Software") and includes the files "waste-setup.exe", "waste-source.zip", "waste-source.tar.gz" and any additional files contained in these files. Nullsoft is the exclusive owner of all right, title and interest in the Software. The posting of the Software on this website was not authorized by Nullsoft. If you downloaded or otherwise obtained a copy of the Software, you acquired no lawful rights to the Software and must destroy any and all copies of the Software, including by deleting it from your computer. Any license that you may believe you acquired with the Software is void, revoked and terminated.

i took that to mean "grab waste-source.tar.gz!!!! it's on!!!!" after reading this article.

Justin Frankel by Trent+Polack · 2003-06-04 05:38 · Score: 3, Informative

Well, you gotta give the guy some credit. I went through Nullsoft's site the other day, and there are just a whole lot of cool little programs that Nullsoft put out. Among them all, Winamp and the Nullsoft installer system are probably my favorite.

I give it up to Justin for being a good guy, and giving a lot of cool little utilities to the programming community.

--
Trent Polack
www.polycat.net

Selective by krumms · 2003-06-04 05:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

I find it really strange that AOL should pull things like Gnutella and WASTE, considering that Nullsoft's primary product, WinAmp, is perhaps the most frequently used by Joe Internet for playing often illegal MP3s. Admittedly, people can use it for legal music too - but go on, most people don't give a fuck.

Likewise, Gnutella/WASTE could be used for good or evil (in the political sense). What makes them so different from WinAmp? Why is file sharing worse than playing music? Given that they already provide the criminal community (so to speak, I mean - call me a crim) an excellent tool for playing their often illegaly acquired music, as well as to the RIAA-friendly users out there - what makes file sharing so goddamn different?

you're free not to work for them. by Artifex · 2003-06-04 05:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've worked for companies before that have draconian contracts, "Anything you think is our property! Hah!"

If you take the contract, you shouldn't complain about the conditions later. I don't mean just you, Xerithane, personally, but anyone in general, and him especially. If he really agreed to this kind of contract, he's given AOL the high road in this matter.

Besides that, even if he worked on it completely independently, without Nullsoft resources, and without a contract giving all IP developed during employment to AOL, they're still free to refuse to let it sit on corporate servers, where it generates legal liability and bandwidth costs for them.

--
Get off my launchpad!

Re:you're free not to work for them. by MunchMunch · 2003-06-04 06:32 · Score: 5, Interesting

"If you take the contract, you shouldn't complain about the conditions later. I don't mean just you, Xerithane, personally, but anyone in general, and him especially. If he really agreed to this kind of contract, he's given AOL the high road in this matter."
Not to sound trite, but I think this is maybe oversimplified. Contracts are compromises, and compromises always leave room for either side to get an advantage over the other. As with many corporations, the power dynamic is such that a contractee may in effect be forced to agree to less than fair provisions because they have become 'standard,' or the job market is tough, or the company is exerting monopoly power, etc. That agreement doesn't make draconian clauses or terms any less draconian, and the "free-market, free choice" ideal shouldn't be an absolute argument when there are such exceptions.
That said, I think it looks like Frankel more or less agrees with you, and that's why he's resigning instead of filing a frivolous lawsuit.
Re:you're free not to work for them. by DarkZero · 2003-06-04 06:37 · Score: 4, Insightful

If you take the contract, you shouldn't complain about the conditions later.

He's not just complaining about it, he's doing something about it, which is leaving the company. Don't act like he's just bitching and moaning about a contract that he could easily get out of, but is still holding himself to for the sake of money and position. He doesn't like his situation, so he's taking action to resolve it. That is not just pathetic little piss ant whining. That's really following through and I think that's worthy of a little respect.
Re:you're free not to work for them. by cc_pirate · 2003-06-04 08:42 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you take the contract, you shouldn't complain about the conditions later. I don't mean just you, Xerithane, personally, but anyone in general, and him especially. If he really agreed to this kind of contract, he's given AOL the high road in this matter.

That's crap. The company has all the power and you have none. If you say no, I don't agree to that clause, then the company (and all companies over a certain size have this clause) will say, "Sorry, we won't hire you."

If you want to work, you don't have a choice. They could say "We demand your firstborn.", and you'd have to sign cheerfully or you're screwed. Does that mean they can make it stick later in court? Almost certainly not... but never fool yourself into thinking you can negotiate as an individual with a multi-national corporation. They will just drop you and grab another disposable employee from the world pool.

--
"There are laws that enslave men, and laws that set them free. " - Sean Connery as King Arthur
Re:you're free not to work for them. by kribor · 2003-06-04 09:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

The point you're missing is that Justin Frankel SOLD Nullsoft to AOL. He didn't have to sell his company to AOL. He could have stayed independent. Of course, he probably would have gone under, so he made a deal with the devil to keep his little company alive. Frankel's situation is not the same as your regular employee. In this case he could have told AOL to F.O., but he didn't. He took the money and now he's bitching up because he doesn't like the rules of the game he chose to play.

I agree with you, an invididual vs. a corporation is almost always a losing proposition and "regular" employees get rufu'ed all the time. However, I have no pity for anyone who sells their company to AOL and then has a pity party on the Net because he's not being allowed to "express" himself. Screw him. There's a truckload of good programmers in this country who just want to be able to go to work, but can't because American companies would rather use cheap labor from the "world pool". And over here we have poor little Justin Frankel, sitting on a bunch of cash and stock options from selling Nullsoft, and you want ME to feel sorry for him? In a pig's eye. Tell the little maricon to grow up.

--
"You can never win or lose if you don't run the race"

Non-compete clauses by glrotate · 2003-06-04 05:50 · Score: 2, Informative

IANALBMSOI (I am not a lawyer but my signifigant other is) and in many states non-competes aren't worth the paper their printed on. One has a right to earn a living that cannot be contractualy waived.

Re:Non-compete clauses by klocwerk · 2003-06-04 07:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

non-compete and right-to-work has nothing to do with this. I live in PA which is a right to work state.
All that really means is that your current or former company can't prevent you from taking another job regardless of what you've signed, IF your other option would be not working.

This guy released code which was created using Nullsoft resources (brainpower, cpu power, company time) and released it under the name of the company. They have every right to rescind that release. The only real issue here is the GPL question, if it's released under GPL can it be pulled back?

He has a job he's choosing to leave, anything he signed in terms of a non-compete is very valid and in place, as he has a perfectly good job he's choosing to leave.

(ianal, but I have just gone through an ordeal with a non-compete and learned a lot.)

--

"You worthless post!"
-Shakespeare, 2 Gentlemen of Verona, 1. 1. 147

It amazes me by darthtuttle · 2003-06-04 05:51 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm always amazed when people get in to business deals, the deal turns out badly, they are forced to move on (for personal convictions, or through corporate moves) and they are amazed and suprised!

Frankel sold out to AOL. He made a LOT of money doing it, but he should (and maybe did) understand the price of that money is freedom. AOL controls Winamp, and as long as he's an employee they control much of his actions and ability to publish.

Were I him I would have not published anything new until the contract requirements to stay with the company were over, then I'd leave and start a new company with all the money. I'm sure his share of 86 million, after taxes could start a new company to do new things.

If you value your life based on what you have done, then investors and selling out is often a bad idea. You are selling control over the products you have created. If on the other hand you value your life based on what your able to do going forward, take the 86 million, walk away from one software product and do something new. Sure, it's a PITA, but 86 million funds a lot of new things. If nothing else you could probably manage a half million a year from investment (even in this market) and live off that while writing new software and paying a buddy or two to write with you. There's bound to be a new idea in there somewhere that will start another company that sells for twice as much, which gives you more allowance, and so on.

It's all personal values.

--
Darthtuttle
Thought Architect

Justin, if you're reading this... by crashnbur · 2003-06-04 05:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's been a good run and, for what it's worth, Nullsoft has generated some of the niftiest and most useful programs I have ever used... Winamp, Sex, then SafeSex, and several of your utilities. I learned quite a bit by examining the code of some of Nullsoft's creations. Thanks for all you've done for the Internet community, and best of luck on your future endeavors. I hope to see your name applied to a new development project in the not-too-distant future...

Huh, dont follow you amigo by Arbogast_II · 2003-06-04 05:54 · Score: 5, Insightful

I am a long time gardener. I hardly have a large income.

Money has little to do with happiness. Unhappy people are unhappy with or without material possessions in most cases.

The man has chosen a wise path, placing his own life ahead of maximizing financial gain at any cost. I dont know the man, but I would bet he is in a much better position in life now. There is a shortage of people following their own life path in this world, and an oversupply of sheep mindlessly plodding along.

As to saying it is easier because he is wealthy, I disagree. Because he is wealthy, it is EASIER for him to get trapped in a world where only money matters, making the choice more difficult.

--

HenryJamesFeltus.com

Re:Huh, dont follow you amigo by maxpublic · 2003-06-04 07:08 · Score: 4, Insightful

Money has little to do with happiness.

The lack of money, however, does. The lack of money can lead to living in piss-poor conditions, or being homeless, or not having enough food to eat. The lack of money, in many places in the world, can lead to death.

When one is simply concerned with scraping enough together to feed one's family, the question of 'happiness' is irrelevant. These questions come *after* the basics have been taken care of.

Max

--
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?

For those that don't have NYTimes accounts.... by Jontu_Kontar · 2003-06-04 05:58 · Score: 2, Informative

You can get a similiar story at CNET.

Ah well. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 06:02 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sad to say, but I think he deserved it to some extent.

It's hard enough to push open source development within a company of any kind when this kind of thing happens. You spend months convincing your boss that the free software community is totally altruistic and then BLAM, this happens and they get scared again. Wonderful.

I had almost persuaded my company to impliment a very large scale GPL application deployment, affecting 10,000 or more desktops - a MAJOR undertaking. All the hoops had been jumped (yes, we will modify GPL code, no we won't distribute our modifications or development code unless it gets cleared through IT, yes we will play nice with the community) and some little shit _steals_ code from his employer and puts it out under the GPL. This is not the bad bit - the bad bit is that the community, insead of helping AOL by respecting their wishes instead just said 'too late, we have it now, sod off' even though it was never intended to be released under the GPL by the legal owner.

Wow, not that surprising then that the edict comes down from on high to freeze the project pending review (this means forever, basically, unless I kill myself with effort once more). Another potential convert lost, who might have followed one GPL app deep into the open source world.

You would scream murder if a company violates the GPL (as would I) - why shouldn't companies extract vengance if the community breaks the same rules, no matter how good they think their reasons are? The end just does not justify the means.

Re:Ah well. by I_redwolf · 2003-06-04 07:24 · Score: 2, Interesting

Ahhh stop with this... The community didn't break any rules. The program was just removed because they didn't want the program to have even been made, or maybe it's because in reality Frankel released it under an unacceptable license not verified by said company or whatever. I mean, to speculate on such things are pointless and for a company to base a decision about Open-Source/GPL on such a situation is rather foolish. If Frankel did release the program under an unacceptable license then that is his bag; it is his fault just like if you decided to release some of you companies software on their website under the GPL. Jesus Christ people, What ever happened to a person commiting a crime and being held responsible for it?? Do we not adhere to that system anymore?? Remember?? That's how it works now??

Then you're saying "he deserved it"; I'm not aware that he was fired or terminated, all it says is that he's unhappy with the current situation, it sucks and he wants out. If he was fired or terminated then I'm sure instead of saying I want to leave because xyz.. He'd say something more like.. I got canned, fuck it I'm happy now. Lastly, AOL should of made sure that this situation didn't happen, that is why they have lawyers, that is why Mozilla is under a different license; etc etc ad nauseam. Not only that but Frankel has released stuff before causing the same exact type of hysteria and the only thing that happened was that the protocol was reverse engineered and is being used widely in/as p2p applications.

The only thing we know for sure is that Frankel and AOL have never seen eye to eye on what he programs and releases and when he does release it's subject to be unauthorized for whatever reason.

If your company has decided to put things on hold based on this, here a hint. They weren't planning on going through with it anyway. You don't tip toe into a situation affecting 10,000 or more desktops and then decide that because a programmer released a program under Opensource/GPL (which he has done before) that was removed; the project needs to be put on hold pending review. Especially since closed/open-source it doesn't matter. Someone can do the samething right this second at your place of work.

Again, be clear.. The community didn't break any rules. Justin Frankel doesn't speak for the community and no one knows the details of the situation. It's also highly unlikely they'll ever be made public. So how your company and yourself come to your own conclusions is beyond the scope and comprehension of the actual situation, extremely premature and bordering childish.

Some people would rather... by CrazyDuke · 2003-06-04 06:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

...die than live in bondage.

"I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" -Patrick Henry

Oh, but this is the modern day United States; we're all supposed to be corporate butt boys and prostitute our lives as wage slaves. All hail the almighty dollar! ...for nothing is more important!

--
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.

Re:Some people would rather... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-04 06:12 · Score: 2, Funny

...die than live in bondage.

Are you kidding me? I'd kill to live in bondage. It would save me that $100 bucks I shell out every week for an hour with the chick in the black leather outfit with the whip...

Re:"everything i code is owned by the company" by Rary · 2003-06-04 06:15 · Score: 3, Informative

Generally, these contracts go much further than that. It is the case, for example, with my own contract that any code I write on my own time, using my own equipment, for my own use, based entirely on my own ideas, belongs to the company I work for.

If I have a spark of creativity one Saturday afternoon whilst drinking a beer on my deck, and it's such a good idea that I think I can quit my job and start a company based on the idea, I will have to get my employer's permission to use that idea, or else cut them in on the profits, because the idea, legally, belongs to them.

I'm pretty sure that applies to our friend Justin as well. Welcome to the world of Corporate Domination of our Very Existence.

--

"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

Why did he have to release it at nullsoft.com? by Fefe · 2003-06-04 06:16 · Score: 3, Interesting

Has has a perfectly fine other web page, and he certainly has enough money to buy a few hundred other domains and servers.

I don't get his complaining about freedom and oppression and stuff. Why can't he just publish his software on some other web page, maybe even under a pseudonym or something.

Re:Why did he have to release it at nullsoft.com? by Jellybob · 2003-06-04 06:22 · Score: 2, Informative

He may well have a contract that says anything he develops is the property of AOL - meaning that he wouldn't be allowed to publish it anywhere without their consent.

Re:Hmm... by Nom+du+Keyboard · 2003-06-04 06:18 · Score: 2, Funny

fortunately, you can use fake information to sign up

Username: Jayson Blair
Password: IMakeItUpAsIGoAlong

--
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."

Another thought on this by SolemnDragon · 2003-06-04 06:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

Money is like health: Having it doesn't mean that you're definitely happy, but not having much of it greatly increases your odds of being unhappy.

There are poor people who are happy and rich who are unhappy. there are also starving people who are too busy looking for something to eat to discuss the question, and rich people who really do enjoy their lives and give back to the community. IANAM (i am not a millionaire) far far far FAR from it in fact, but i think that a person should choose their own path in such a way that it preferably doesn't leave them starving and gives them enough that they can share. And to do this by ethical means in the American culture is sometimes difficult, yes, but a good thing to aim for.

Will leaving make his life better? Probably. Will it make him poorer? In the short run, probably. In the long run, probably not- if he has the skills, there will be a way to apply them, and hopefully in an environment which better suits his temperament. Mind you, this is coming from someone who works a day job unrelated to any of her interests (but not against my ethics) in order to stay solvent. For the moment, it's where i'm at. I couldn't imagine doing it for the rest of my life, however.

May we all have jobs that we can live for, enough to live on and to share, and the good sense to appreciate both??

--
"I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.

Re:Another thought on this by actor_au · 2003-06-04 13:52 · Score: 2, Funny

IANAM (i am not a millionaire) far far far FAR from it in fact

I on the other hand, am a millionaire, I invested in AOL about three years ago, no doubt by now my shares have increased tenfold, just like they told me they would.

--
Read Errant Story.

NYTimes gets it wrong...again... by mrex · 2003-06-04 06:28 · Score: 3, Insightful

From the NYT article:

Nullsoft's latest creation was a file-sharing program that allowed users to set up secure networks of no more than 50 people.

WASTE was pretty obviously not a filesharing program. It was a small group collaboration program, that allowed encrypted chat and transfers. Its use as a file-sharing mechanism in the way that your average NYTimes reader would interpret that term is extremely limited to non existent. It's a "file sharing program" in the same way that AOL Instant Messenger is. Does the NYT refer to AIM that way?

Then again, maybe I'm the silly one for expecting accuracy, nay, competence, in reporting in the major media outlets.

Yes, but..... by Ride-My-Rocket · 2003-06-04 06:32 · Score: 2, Interesting

Open-source hacking may be better for the community, but it don't pay the bills.

Selling one's company for $86 million certainly does, though. I think he's stayed on this long to continue working on the project he loved...... I don't think it's about the money any more. So does exist the possibility he'll go OSS, or perhaps form another company, cherry-pick his former co-workers at NullSoft and finance the operation out of his pocket. I bet he's waiting to see what the terms of his noncompete mean, and whether they're something he can get around.

Re:Why did this take so long? This is why! by Nom+du+Keyboard · 2003-06-04 06:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

Why does Frankel need AOL?

You are clearly not familiar with most buyouts. The buyout is contingent on an identified number of key people remaining with the company, usually for set periods of time. Buyouts can be reduced, or cancelled entirely, if enough key people refuse to sign-on to the new company. (Btw, being a key person in a buyout is a great place to be.)

Furthermore, top people are often contracted to remain for a set number of years. These are usually the people who are getting the bulk of the buyout money to start with. No doubt in my mind that Justin had to remain with Nullsoft for a long period of time...

...unless something like this comes up, that is.

I'm sure Justin isn't wanting for money these days. Freedom yes, now that he can afford it. I just wonder about the scope of his non-compete agreement and his lack of ability (these are also parts of buyouts) to hire away anyone else he already likes working with to any new company he forms for some long set period of time.

Buyouts are seldom, if ever, you get the money and can then go and do as you wish with it.

--
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."

Re:Long Decline Anyway - Actually we are gaining by stretch0611 · 2003-06-04 07:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

So are we really losing bigtime here?

Actually, I think we are gaining. After all, AOL is losing a good programmer, and the world is gaining a programmer that is not bound by corporate interests.

--
Looking for a job?
Want your resume written professionally?
DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!

Re:Assignment of copyright and the GPL by egomaniac · 2003-06-04 07:28 · Score: 2, Insightful

But Joe Programmer works for The Company. Therefore, acting as a representative of The Company, he can quite legally release the stuff under GPL.

Bullshit. The fact that someone works for a company does not ipso facto give them the right to negotiate contracts. For instance, if Justin had publicly said "Hey, AOL's monthly charges are now all $0.00! Have fun, everybody!" he would be instantly fired and his statements would be unenforceable, as he does not have the right to make such decisions. Likewise, his job does not entail the right to stipulate licenses (GPL in this case) on behalf of the company, so any such statements he makes are utterly meaningless. This is the only sane way for a company to operate -- imagine if the janitors from two companies negotiated a major deal, and the companies were both then bound to obey it simply because two of their employees made an agreement with one another.

If a used car salesman gave away fifty sports cars for free before his boss noticed what he was doing, do you think that the recipients would ever get their free cars? Of course not, as the employee is acting completely outside of his bounds and any such contracts he negotiates are unenforceable.

--
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck

Frankel vs. JWZ by VooDoo999 · 2003-06-04 07:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

Does anyone else see the parallels here?

Talented young programmer, burnt out by the system, chucks it all after a few years of corporate slavery to AOL and rides off into the sunset with a lot of cash.

Zawinski left when his options vested, and I'm guessing Frankel has some other contractual or monetary force keeping him there, otherwise he'd be out.

Doesn't bode well for AOL at any rate.

losing millions? by peter303 · 2003-06-04 07:55 · Score: 4, Informative

The purchase of a company usually has a retention clause saying you dont get all your money until you have worked X years. X ranges from one to five years. The purpose is (1) the company's assets are often its creative people and (2) to train successors. It is unclear if he is losing some of the purchase money due to his independent streak.
The pruchase was in stock currency, so its value declined with AOL Time Warner stock price. Could have been worse considering other dot.coms.

Correct, in my experience by The+Tyro · 2003-06-04 07:59 · Score: 2, Informative

Non-compete clauses used to be common in medical contracts, and most physicians will attempt to get them removed from the contract during negotiations.

It's usually not a serious bone of contention, because the unspoken reality is this: non-competes, particularly geographic ones (ie. you cannot practice within a 60-mile radius) are generally viewed negatively by the courts, and do not hold up.

As for programmers... that might be a different story.

--
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.

It's just DOT COM-ism by sleeper0 · 2003-06-04 08:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

Everyone all upset about aol (aka the man) keeping justin down should consider this:

june 1, 1999: aol buys nullsoft for $86m

june 2, 2003: justin announces resignation due to creative differences

For those who can't connect the dots, he had a 4 year stock vesting schedule. Justin didn't have enough trouble with his free expression while his stock was still vesting, but now that it's done he suddenly feels the pangs of regret for working for the corporate machine.

There's nothing wrong with leaving after your contracts are up, but why not be a man about it? Releasing a ton of code you don't own under the GPL (and indeed, has code in it that can't be released this way due to RSA copyright) and yamering on in public about your former employer is at best pretty immature.

Justin obviously made out quite well selling a media player for nearly $100m. Anyone that's followed the ups and extreme downs of the industry knows that its unlikely nullsoft was ever worth that big of a price tag. Why not exit out of the situation gracefully and be thankful for the luck he had in getting the deal instead of granstanding for your hacker friends.

Re:It's just DOT COM-ism by An+Onerous+Coward · 2003-06-04 11:00 · Score: 2, Insightful

Actually, according to this cyberlaw.com article, the RSA patent [not copyright] expired back in 2000. So the only issue regarding the GPL'ing of WASTE is whether Justin or AOL owns the code.

Judging from what happened, and from Justin's blog, it sounds like he thought he owned the code, but AOL asserted its rights. Perhaps he used WASTE as a test case, to see if the corporate AOL culture was compatable with his attitude.

That's just a theory, of course.

--
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
Re:It's just DOT COM-ism by sleeper0 · 2003-06-04 11:28 · Score: 2, Informative

when you buy a company with stock, part of what you buy is a term of service with key contributors. This is so important folks like CEO's don't bail the day after the deal leaving you holding the bag with a company you cant run or a product that still needs work.

thats what applies in this situation. I'm not talking about options that employees are awarded at market value as part of a typical compensation package (though i'm sure he had these too).

We're talking about a financial transaction to buy a company. You cant buy a company with 1 million of your own options priced at your current market value... That would be close to trying to buy a company with no money at all. Instead they use real stock, one that has an actual cash value (something that an option at current market price doesnt have). But that doesnt mean they can't put provisions on its release, which is where the vesting comes in.

Re:Assignment of copyright and the GPL by gmhowell · 2003-06-04 09:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

Justin was/is the CEO of the company (Nullsoft) that released the software. It can be as legal as any other contract, thanks to the doctrine of 'apparent authority'. If the other party (someone dl'ing WASTE) has good reason to believe the other person (Justin) has authority to speak for the company (as CEO of Nullsoft, he has at least the appearance of authority) then the contract can be upheld.

The janitor couldn't release this software. Well, he could, but it's unlikely that a reasonable person would think that a janitor could speak for a company. Not so the CEO. Similarly, Justin is not CEO at AOL, so could not change pricing there. However, whoever replaced Steve Case could do something like that.

The car salesman probably couldn't give away fifty free cars. The owner could. Further, if there was a sales manager, he could probably give away the cars.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon

Sucks for him... by autopr0n · 2003-06-04 10:03 · Score: 2, Funny

given AOL's nearly 80% drop in price. He sold the company for $86 mil, and got to take home $20, divided among the original stockholders.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.

In Frankel's Defense by qortra · 2003-06-04 10:32 · Score: 4, Interesting

I don't know very much about the business end of corporate buyouts or corporate software licensing, but I'll assume that you are accurate with your facts and your speculation. Furthermore, I do totally respect your opinion about Frankel, under certain circumstances, I would probably agree with you; I just want him to get a fair defense.

You say that, of him, that "yamering on in public about [his] former employer is at best pretty immature." While this is true, he isn't guilty of this particular thing (at least in the links that slashdot provided; i would welcome others if you have them). In fact, he says (of AOLTW), "I have nothing but respect for the company". All he claims is that the company owns his code, and it seem to me that you agree with that statement.

If there was financial timing involved, its possible that he came to his conclusion about leaving a while ago (perhaps after gnutella got ganked), and just postponed his departure until after he was financially secure. This too, to me, is totally valid; its a lot easier to practice your art (whatever that may be) if you don't have to worry about money. Four years of compromise might mean, for Frankel, a lifetime of doing just what he's wanted.

Which brings us to WASTE. First of all, I need to plead ignorance here; perhaps you can explain to me why Mozilla folk can release GPL code while still working for AOLTW, and Frankel can't. Is it a difference in their contracts? If so, do you have access to their contracts to show me the differences? But alas, I promised to assume that your factual information is accurate. So, he did something wrong and illegal by claiming to release GPLed code under Nullsoft. However, I'd like to think that this is another part of self-expression, perhaps similar to graffiti (which, although it is wrong, and ought to be wrong, is still sometimes beautiful/powerful art, and a real form of self expression). Sometimes, the method of communicating your art (in his case, as his last act of working for Nullsoft) is as important as the art itself. It sounds illogical, and grounded more in romantic ideals than in fact, but I can imagine that being important to Frankel.

Thanks for your comment, and please respond or email me if I've misrepresented your opinion in any way.

Re:In Frankel's Defense by An+Onerous+Coward · 2003-06-04 11:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

[I could be wrong, but I do believe]

The big difference between the GPL and the Mozilla Public License: Any patches, features, and whatnot that the Mozilla project accepts have their copyright transferred to the Mozilla project. This leaves them the option of closing future releases (though they cannot take back rights granted to the code already out there.

With the regular ol' GPL, once you've incorporated someone else's code into your project, you have to get their permission to license it under other terms. With a huge project with thousands of contributors, this is no small feat.

That is how AOL is able to release Netscape without releasing the applicable source code. I wonder what would have happened if WASTE had been MPL'ed instead.

--
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
Re:In Frankel's Defense by alienw · 2003-06-04 14:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

The difference is simple. With Mozilla, AOL managers, lawyers, and executives were all notified about the decision and probably all had to approve it. In other words, it was official. With WASTE, apparently Justin simply stuck some AOL-owned code on a public website without anyone's permission or knowledge. This was certainly not offical, and AOL understandably decided to correct the problem.

Slashdot Mirror

Justin Frankel Resigns From Nullsoft

124 of 608 comments (clear)