Slashdot Mirror
VIA Pulls PadLockSL
yipyow writes "A few weeks ago VIA Technologies posted software based on Nullsoft's WASTE, as reported here a few days ago. VIA PadLockSL included both a Windows and Linux client and some special extensions to work with security hardware built into certain VIA products. It was released under the GPL so I managed to snag a copy of the source code right before VIA suddenly removed their page (Google cache). I have posted Linux compilation instructions and mirrored the source here. If VIA has decided not to pursue the project further, I think the F/OSS community should turn this project into something, it has potential to be a great tool."
It might be a good idea to find out why it was removed. Perhaps they discovered a license violation and took it down to prevent a lawsuit. While noble, the automatic assumption that they simply don't want to pursue the project could be placing yipyow in an actionable position.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
Although without the support of VIA how would one keep developing this since it uses their security hardware. As chip design changes, you would need to know how to make calls to the chip or the program becomes useless... Does VIA offer documentation on their chipsets?
Yes, I saw this, but I don't think I'm doing a bad thing necessarily...if this is legit code, and a legit usage of the GPL, etc., then why are Nullsoft/others making such a big deal out of it? Open source projects get forked all the time, though VIA didn't exactly give WASTE proper credit, they did release it under the GPL. Many companies would just claim it was theirs entirely, and not release the code at all. If this is a legit usage of the GPL, and VIA don't want to support the community, the community can pick up the source code and use it however they can. That is (in my mind) how the Free Software world works, that's the whole point of releasing source code in the first place. PadLockSL is, as far as I can see, a legitimate derivative work as described under the GPL. Can anyone prove me wrong?
good question
whats the situation when someone adds a lot to some code?
is it okay to remove the copyright info or change it. is it okay even if you did not touch that file.
Most likely, the copyright of the software is and always was held by Nullsoft, not the author. Therefore, the author didn't have the right to license the software under the GPL (or any other license) in the first place.
It's not that simple. If I work for a store, and it is normal duty of mine to do sales and quote prices. I'm am acting on behalf of that company when doing so.
If I work for Nullsoft and it is my normal duty to release software, I am acting on behalf of nullsoft when I do so.
If I have been delegated the authority to release software, and I release a software package, Nullsoft has just released that software package.
Things need to work this way, otherwise it would be WAY to easy for companies to wriggle out of contract that became inconvenient.
The exception would be when an employee obviously doesn't have the authority to do what they are doing (say a Microsoft intern releasing the windows source). Now if Ballmer himself were to release the Windows source code, even for a couple days, it would have to stick because he clearly had the authority to do so.
In the case of Nullsoft, the guy who released waste, obviously had the authority to do so.
Life is too short to proofread.
http://www.mousearmy.net/tech/
In the top section I've posted the original waste source, current waste source, PadLockSL source and some of the windows binaries mirrored in this thread.
This should consolodate the mirrored files in one place.
"Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
In the case of Nullsoft, the guy who released waste, obviously had the authority to do so.
Why are you so sure he indeed had the authority to do so (source code and all w/ a GPL license? Are you his boss, perhaps, or maybe a Nullsoft lawyer? Have you read the Nullsoft source release policy statement? Do you have the employee's job description on your desk? Are you bugging Nullsoft's corporate offices? Why are you so obviously authoritative on this issue? Inquiring minds want to know!
FreeSpeech.org