Slashdot Mirror
Ekush: A CherryOS For the Windows World?
GvG writes "Yesterday, Ekush version 0.10 was released (binary only, no source). Ekush is a relatively new attempt at cloning Microsoft Windows. The ReactOS project has the goal of creating a GPLed OS that is compatible with Microsoft Windows applications and drivers.
The release of Ekush caused some uproar in the ReactOS community, since it soon became apparent that Ekush was not much more than a repackaged version of ReactOS. Doing a simple string search for ReactOS on the Ekush binaries showed a number of hits. (Read on for more.)
GvG continues "Shortly after this was reported on the ReactOS mailing list, the Ekush website went down "for maintenance". Today they are back with a slightly altered set of binaries, which no longer contain the ASCII string "ReactOS". However, they forgot to search for Unicode strings... Ekush is not only violating the rights of ReactOS by deriving a product without releasing the modified source, they also derive code of (and are violating the rights of) Wine, FreeType and QEmu."
Larry Snyder adds "Additionally, at the time of this writing, their binary floppy diskette driver appears to be a near exact copy of the Windows 2k pro fdc.sys driver, with the copyright string and header changed."
It is too bad that a lot of people confuse Open Source with Public Domain. That is the problem with free software that is open source is that people feel compelled that they could use it to "Make" their own product without any form of recognition to the original developers. While I feel the GPL is strict on a lot of thing that it shouldn't be but just blatantly releasing a product that is based off an Open Source project with a different license is just wrong. I think there should be more education for the public that Free Software is not Public Domain and ripping off Open Source Work is just as bad a Pirating Closed Source Software. It is too bad that Commercial Enterprise doesn't respect IP Rights.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
...at getting purposely slashdotted for the purpose of testing some new server-side app like CherryOS turned out to be?
SmashTech - No smashing of tech involved
Could it be that these various randomly 'popping-up' projects, gathering press around the 'theft' of code from OSS projects, is part of a larger dilution strategy?
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
we's gonna get ourselves a GPL violator!
Damien
Now we neeed a Cherry OS for Linux
Oh wait...
I have already covered it here.
http://www.winehq.com/?interview=14
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
The website mntions that its designed for the Bangladesh market. I went to college with a prince of Bangladesh. He screwed me over on our final project for physics. Didn't show up for the presentation, then claimed that he had done all of the work I presented. Unfortunate for him, he didn't relalise that I had been consulting the professor on a regular basis about the project. So it was obvious who was telling the truth. I'm not saying everyone there is corrupt. In fact, the only problem I had with the situation is that he didn't even offer me a bribe of any kind.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Gates and Allen have a hand in this....I can smelly their durty, little mutts all over it. Why, if I had half the might I'd show them what for and kick their middle eastern butts back into the democratic hell hole they come from. Grrrrrrrrrr
I have been distantly following the ReactOS project and even gave it a short test in a Virtual PC environment. It has a long way to go yet. It also has a tough uphill battle since you could (feasibly) purchase Windows NT and licenses on eBay and outfit yourself with the real deal, minus ongoing support from Microsoft.
So is this a fork in the code? And why would you do such a fork at such an early stage? I cannot see that there is any money to be made from ReactOS or EKush yet.
Have you Meta Moderated t
Are we trying to slashdot pages of guys violating the GPL or what? The site's like taken offline right now man.
Wait... That sounds like a good idea... no more than a version of http://www.aa419.org/, Artists against 419 scammers...
Well they don't deny they used other project's code, but until they rewrite everything, they really should:
release code or
keep everything private,
as stated in GPL.
... and who can deny that the "roadmap" they worked so hard to develop (as commented on their home page) comprises PDF's of "Visual BASIC For Dummies", and "Teach Yourself Programming In 21 Days" ... the usual documentary output of any Infosys, Satyam, Wipro or similar programming team.
They do have copyright law in Bangladesh -- they signed onto the Universal Copyright Convention. And they're WTO members, so that's even more restrictive when it comes to intellectual property.
That wouldn't really work. Stealing from OSS won't dilute the copyright; legally you can't dilute copyright. What WILL happen is that OSS will gain strength because they will have successful examples and experience under their belt with defending copylefted copyrights from theft.
I think if we're going to have a conspiracy theory, a slightly more realistic-- and more fun!-- one would be that a series of dedicated but unskilled open source programmers formed a professional suicide pact a couple years ago when the SCO case started to break off ties with one another. The pactmembers were to scatter into industry and independently begin projects which transparently steal open source code and put them into propeitary products, in hopes that these projects would be slapped down by the open source community and that the press would report on it. Once their projects were slapped down this would create positive press for the open source community and counter SCO's lie that OSS regularly steals from propreitary software and the nature of OSS makes this likely by demonstrating that it is, in fact, the other way around.
This was all, of course, orchestrated by the reanimated corpse of open-source sympathetic Nicola Tesla.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
With BSD you have far less requirements to give credit to the original creator.
So change the words open source in your speech with GPL and you are right. Use open source and you show you haven't understood anything.
Then again you use IP rights. Lets be clear. Open source and Free software are often mis used when instead you should use a license name like BSD/GPL/LGPL/Public domain/god knows what
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
"Ripping off" free software is actually worse because it confuses the message of free software. The message of free software is that free people can co-operate to make tools for themselves that work. A ripped free software tool with "improvements" directly undermines that message by trying to convince people that they need some closed software to make their lives easier. Typically, the ripped version is inferior but the money involved will create a stream of advertising that says otherwise. Public education on the value, cause and workings of free software is an ongoing project.
It is too bad that a lot of people confuse Open Source with Public Domain.
No, these bozos knew what they were doing and did not limit their "theft" to free software. They knew that they were violating licenses for free software just as much as they knew they were violating M$'s license by distributing their floppy driver. Since having the obvious string matches pointed out, they have tried to replace them without bothering to replace binaries or release source code. As the easiest thing to do would be to release source code, these people are up to no good and know it.
We shall see if they come clean. If they don't and M$ does not clean their clock, we can draw further conclusions.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Microsoft Windows is the most acknowledged operating system throughout the world. But it is highly dominated artifact to the people and MS have a monopoly to our desktop. Due to the fact, EKUSH is a lineup effort to the Win32 platform, an alternative OS to run your existing windows applications. Our focus is to build the alternative platform; a brilliant Operating System for our community.
Now THAT is a professional blurb -- wait here while I get my credit card!
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
Slow???
We have third party drivers loading, a explorer.exe clone, application support such as OpenOffice for Win32 loading not to mention we have made replacement apps for regedit, taskmgr, and a Windows like install system. Whats slow about ReactOS development?
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Who is Ladesh and why does everyone say to bang her?
...There is a huge difference here. People don't download the latest *insert crappy pop artist here* and claim that they wrote that song.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Making a copy of a CD, and using someone elses code without citation are somewhat different things. The number of people who copy music is high. The number of people here who copy their CD version of "Brick in the Wall", change the tags (but not the music), and pass it off as their the result of their own creative genius is probably zero.
for fdc.sys. They'll stomp them but good. And we'll get GPL enforcement as a free side-effect!
Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
You'd think that, maybe, by the time they're compitent enough to even attempt to pull shit like this people would understand such "1337" tools as strings and grep.
Not only are they crooks they're no more than script kiddies . . . . .
Only in a Slashdot fantasy can a Slackware install turn into several hours of sex . . . . .
It's not a clone, it's an OS that is trying to be Windows binary compatible.
You could say they're trying to make a better "Windows".
I know we all love linux here, but IMO the only way to take desktops away from MSFT is to replace them with something thats compatible: something that runs all the same apps and games and supports all the same hardware by way of the same drivers.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
I am the parent poster and I agree.
I develop custom software for a lot of companies and making sure that I follow the licenes is very dear to me because that way the company feels comfortable, with me and feels secure using the project. If I use a GPL Library I tell them that I am using a GPL library and if anyone want the source to this program you will have to release it to them. Which isn't an issue for most companies because their Data is far more important then the sourcecode use to manipulate it.
BTW.
I was actually making a little joke to conflect Microsoft and SCO who accuse Open Source Programmers not Respecting IP which is just the same gross generalisation.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
No one is saying that copyright violation isn't wrong...the point is that it is just that, "copyright violation/infringement," and not "theft."
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
They got hit with in-school suspension....
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
Or to state it shorter:
There's a difference between copying and plagiarism.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Not to mention that even the courts hold a much different standard for infringement based on whether or not the end goal was financial gain. Your average music piracy is not-for-profit.
Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
Eeeugh! Who would want to order drinks in their bar? They'd fill your glass from other glasses, puddles on the bar and slop from the taps-- IF you're lucky!
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Your point is good and true one, but I'm not sure it is valid in the context of the story. They were not confusing Public Domain and Open Source. When they changed and removed the ascii string "ReactOS" is proof that they knew what they were doing was wrong. Sometimes coorporations are so large or disorginized that an upper management person is misinformed, but after they relieze their mistake, most(there are exceptions) will correct it by releasing source code or discontining product.
Insert Witty Remark Here ===>____________________________
I just thought the parallel was interesting. I really didn't mean to spread any predjudice. But, there is a bit of truth in saying that the contry is corrupt. Read this Bangladesh was recently named the most corrupt nation on earth.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
sounds like in the reasonably near future we will have an OS that can run some MS Windows apps without being MS Windows. I think this is wonderful. I hope it survives the lawsuits MS will undoubtably try to kill it with (whether the suits have merit or not, they will probably try). May the Force and the Schwartz) be with you!
I have nothing witty to fill this space with yet.
In music/movies/etc...you are granted fair use rights to create archival copies of those movies or music. True, some go over the top and want communist music and movies, but that's not necessary to allow you to make an mp3 of a song on a CD you own.
In this story, there is an existing license available for others to be able to reuse some copyrighted material, but copying, in and of itself is not the problem. If the jackasses who stole the GPL'ed software had put the source code up for download (and given attribution to the original author and licensed their work under the GPL) there would be no problem with them selling as many copies as they wanted. What's at issue is that they are not creating copies in accordance with what fair use allows *or* with what the applicable license (the GPL) allows.
Interesting, my ass.
"Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
Thank you. I always was a wordy bastard :)
Nothing is slow about it! Ignore the moron :) You guys are doing an awesome job and it's much appreciated. Please keep up the great work. I think the grandparent underestimates the challenge at hand. The fact that you guys are making the progress that you have seems amazing.
Regards,
Steve
Will reactos binaries work under ms windows? I see in another post you say you've got an explorer clone, and some other clones of windows programs. I'd imagine your binaries would have to be .exe's and .dll's. Would I be able to replace my explorer.exe with your's? Of course chances are there'd probably be some programs that won't like the change very much, but have you tried running your apps under ms windows, and how well do they work?
Hmm.. How about:
Because having thousands of people noticing 'Look! There's copyright infringement going on over at _this_ site!" is just about the fastest way to get a site shut-down nowadays.
Scams and frauds are crimes best dealt with as publicly as possible. Do you seriously believe anyone is going to buy their 'product' because of this story?
Considering that NT was built on 10 years of development (NT4), and that ReactOS has only really been in steady development since 3/4 years, and that we already support some Windows 2003/Longhorn features, I wouldn't call it slow.
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
Kernel Developer, ReactOS
You should be able to access suicide girls now since no one has posted about them recently...Crap.
I have 3656.9 Bogomips. How many Bogomips do you have?
I agree. It's the only way to get average users away from the MS they've been taught is the One True OS. But you need more than that; I remember setting up OS/2 in a lab in college; it was more stable and ran Windows (3.x) apps better than windows did. It didn't let an app crash windows and it didn't let Windows crash os/2. It was a great product. It died penniless and alone like certain literary figures in part because it didn't have a good advertising agent. if you build a better, faster, cheaper, rock-solid OS, they will come -- if they know about it, if it looks familiar, and if it runs what they have exactly like their old OS, but BETTER. But it has to be better as in "noticeable to Joe Average User" better, not as in "geeks know it's more stable" or "some people know non-monopoly is better.
I have nothing witty to fill this space with yet.
They're website has been suspended by the hosting company. I think maybe somebody at M$ noticed the posting here...
Seriously guys, we need a law firm dedicated to fighting for OSS projects. I know that companies like IBM have pitched in and fought for our side, but what happens when the liabilities start sliding in the direction of OSS? For example, look at the massive amount of software patents that have been awarded lately. If you don't think that Microsoft and just about all the other commercial comapnies are trying to build up a warchest, a cache of PMDs (Patents of Mass Destruction[tm]), then you need to wake the hell up.
The OSS crowd needs to start playing the game. Hell maybe some OSS projects should look at patenting their methods. You gotta fight if you want to be in the war. CherryOS and its ilk should have already had lawsuits sitting on their doorstep. Considering that in general OSS is mostly comprised of volunteer developers, there really is not any sort of cost involved in its development. How can you claim damages on something that is free to the public to use and distribute? What is copyright violation worth when the software has no value in dollars?
I'm sure that some lawyers may read slashdot, and hopefully this post. To this I say to you. Join our side! OSS and the GPL are going to face some of the hardest trials in court yet. That little SCO dispute was small fries compared to the challenges ahead. Wait until an 800lb gorilla steps in.......
zosxavius photography
I don't think think it's any kind of conspiracy. It's very simple. You give away code for free, and ask everybody politely not to steal it please, with no real money or leverage to back it up. Well, anyone who's older than 8 should not be so naive as to expect everybody to respect their wishes. That's just delusional. Of course open source code is going to be stolen and used in closed source apps, or poprietary apps. It's probably already been done thousands of times, and will continue to happen.
It's along the lines of crossing at a "crosswalk" anywhere in suburbia America, and assuming that everybody will stop for you since it's the law. Law is one thing, but reality would intervene on that daydream, and you'd get flattened.
I don't respond to AC's.
Well, IP Rights do not deserve capitals, in my opinion.
If you are talking about copyrights, well, it can be argued that they should be respected by big players, at least in the current state of affairs.
If you refer to anything else that is not copyright by that "IP Rights" title, I disagree with you. Things like software patents and such should not be respected, because it is of no use.
On the other hand, although we would all be better off without copyrights in the first place, while we are forced to respected them, it would be good that companies are too.
The GPL, with it's copyleft, sort-of cancels out the copyright laws, making content free for the user. If we are forced to follow copyright rules, and companies aren't, there would be the risk of people taking chunks of copylefted code, and closing them again. We don't want that to happen.
But failing to respect copyright is not bad in principle, it is bad just because it hurts our freedom.
Further in your post you talk about "Pirating Closed Source Software" being bad.
You fail twice there.
Pirating is killing people, raping, and stealing, sinking ships, drowning people. Unauthorized copying of proprietary software is not pirating. Liberating would even be closer. Self-infringed punishment would be much closer, with respect to some software packages.
The difference between the two cases is that when you copy a CD of proprietary software, a publisher allegedly loses some amount of fictional money that you were not willing to spend anyway.
When someone re-releases GPLed code, it's lots of people who lose their freedom, not money.
So, case 1 - some people lose some fictional money. Someone earns some aditional freedom.
Case 2 - everybody loses freedom. Someone makes some money.
Both are copyright infringement. Only, one is bad for people, and the other is not.
In the end, thanks, I really enjoyed your troll-style capitalising of buzzwords.
The interesting thing is that this guy is not a stranger to OSS either, he's got a savannah account.
A picture of this con artist showing off the work of other's he's trying to take credit for: here
The related article says:
"Licensing is one of the problems the Ekush team is expecting to face. As the project is not based in the US, Ekush OS will not be able to obtain the license banner of General Public License (GPL), the US-based licensing company."
Showing that either Mr. Ranju or the journalist (or likely both) have little clue on the GPL.
Copyright violation confers five basic rights to the creator:
1) The right to distribute (making copies available on the internet is most certainly distribution)
2) The right to make copies (there are some fair use exemptions to this but they are very limited and making copies available on the internet violates this as well)
3) The right to make derivative works (this is most likely what is violated when you take someone else's code, rewrap it in another app and claim it as your own)
4) The right to display publicly
5) The right to perform publicly
When someone takes code, rewraps it in their own app and passes it off as their own work they are violating 1, 2, and 3 mentioned above. The new app is a derivative work, it uses code that was unlawfully copied and redistributes it without permission. The problem is there are no degrees of distinction in the law which states violating numbers 1 and 3 are extremely bad while we can let you skate on numbers 2 and 5 if you're not being too bad. Certainly a judge can make a determination on his/her own as to punishment but copyright law is unambiguous here when it comes to whether a violation occurred. Basically there is no difference except that you are violating different rights granted the creator of the work in question.
Except that a lot of people argue that file-sharers aren't claiming that the music they are sharing is their own work, and therefore it is not copyright violation either.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Site is either slashdotted or their hosting account has just expired.
./" page to put up to ./ requests, and just let "normal" traffic through...
You'd think hosting companies would by now have a special "bandwidth limit exceeded by hordes of people from
The fact they went back to hide more 'evidence' clearly shows their intent.
Anyone can mess up ( 'we plan on releasing source',' we didnt mean to change said copyright text', etc ).. But clearly this isnt a screwup.
Looks like their site has been turned off by their hosting service.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
May just be me, but its scary to hear the phrases "cloning Microsoft Windows" and GPL in the same context. Seems like we are just creating a door for legal problems.
It's not about confusing OS with public domain, that would imply a mistake or misinterpretation. These folks are knowingly violating copyright. They're changing things to make it look like it's an unrelated product to hide that fact (especially if the "fdc.sys" statement is true)
With apparently violations across the board for Ekush, I wonder what it would be like to have GPL-using companies and MS in the same courtroom, sueing the same defendant...
If Ashcroft were here, he'd be going after these Linux copywrongdoers tooth and nail! Er, because he accomplished the goal of securing the US from crime and terror...
--
make install -not war
ReactOS may well be cool, but *UGH* they really need to find someone that knows how to write HTML.
I wondered why as I hovered over links the font size changed, cusing the entire page to flicker all over the place - then I found why:
From their page source:
meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 5.0"
Friends dont let Friends use MSFP
Well, Shamsuddoha Ranju, who owns the domain for the web site is not even in the US. So perhaps he really doesn't care one way or another about US copyrights? Software has got to be free, you know.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Just tried to hit the link for the Ekush site and got --
This Hosting Account is Expired/Suspended
If you are the site administrator click here to contact with Technobd.com
I'm on a chair.
> Whats slow about ReactOS development?
It tooks you 6 whole minutes to write a two line rebuttal !
OS/2 died, in part, because in those days, IBM was the "big evil computer monopoly", and everyone in the industry couldn't wait to stick it to em by using Microsoft's cheaper alternative. That, and all the killer apps were written for Windows, not OS/2 so there was really no compelling reason (from a business POV) to pay more for it.
Windows could die the same way.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Oh, and I know people are going to misread what I've just asked, so I'd better say that I'm not advocating ripping off people's code. I'm just asking why you call this "self-interest".
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
they also derive code of (and are violating the rights of) Wine, FreeType and QEmu
Just a pit-nick; AFAIK FreeType is distributed under a license which does not require redistribution of source.
When the CherryOS thing happened, it was called "source code theft." The same response is happening with this.
Why is it theft when it comes to GPL OSS programs, but it's suddenly NOT theft (instead, it's a "culture revolution") when it comes to taking music and movies from p2p networks? And why is it bad to violate GPL copyright but okay to violate the copyrights of music artists? I just don't understand the difference there and wonder how people reconcile those viewpoints in their minds. To me, it seems that Slashdot takes a stance against copyright in one breath, then in the next suddenly speaks out against violations of GPL copyright.
Except that a lot of people argue that file-sharers aren't claiming that the music they are sharing is their own work, and therefore it is not copyright violation either.
In some cases, it may be more likely that you infringe when you share your own musical work. Some claim that the incumbent music publishers have snapped up the copyrights in almost every possible melody in the Western musical system, making any independent work an infringing derivative work.
In addition, the definition of "theft" in some states includes the copying of a sound recording without permission and with intent to distribute.
What's that I keep hearing around here when music and movie copyrights are violated, "it's not stolen
The difference is that courts tend to interpret the exclusive right to prepare derivative works much more broadly for "creative" works, such as musical works, sound recordings, dramatic literary works, and audiovisual works[1], than for "functional" works such as computer programs. Analogy is as if Microsoft could copyright the Windows API, making Wine an infringement, or if Xerox and Apple could copyright the Mac OS GUI, making Windows and X11 environments an infringement. It's easier to avoid infringing a copyright on software (especially compared to music), so Slashdot users tend to regard such a violation as more egregious.
[1] If you aren't familiar with copyright law terminology, the respective digital embodiments of these classes of works are MIDI files, Ogg Vorbis files, movie scripts in a markup language, and AVI files.
Who are you talking about? I like copyright just fine.
I think the time is a bit long, but that is a second point.
I don't illegally share IP material. I demand protection of my rights for code use and any other IP I generate. I think musicians deserve the same protection for their work.
No, the OS that stays crunchy in milk!
Filled with vitamin fortified DLL's!
And a free application in every box!
emt 377 emt 4
"Where stealing technologies from big commercial company is good(tm), and company that protect their assets are bad(tm). Company stealing from open source is Bad(tm) and open source that protect their asset(!!!???) is good(tm)."
man how I wish I had mod points right now..
We don't like copyright as it's currently abused, and we believe that all useful material should be shared. Thus we have no problem with someone copying a program, or copying a music file. That's what the GPL is all about, really, the right to copy. What we do have a problem with is falsely claiming ownership. If this company was selling Britney songs for lots of money claiming to have written them, we'd have the same objections as we do now. If the company was putting gpl programs on an ftp site and distributing them over p2p, we'd have no problem with it.
I am trolling
Second, you're talking about key generators, cracked security keys, etc, largely used for piracy. Most open source advocated are NOT pirates of music or software. And, many would argue that software piracy greatly hurts the value of open source software since people don't realize the true cost of the software they pirate. This is not a motivation for typical open source advocates to crack things.
Third, you're talking about fairly using something that someone has attempted to unfairly restrict your use of. This is where iTunes and deCSS fall under. If I go to Best Buy and purchase a copy of the Terminator and want to watch it on my computer, should I not be able to, just becuase it's encrypted? Of course not. I should be able to watch it on my pc, rip it to DivX to keep a smaller copy on my computer for play on my xbox/playstation2. This is a moral breaking of an unjust law, and it's legality is irrelevant. Same goes for iTunes, they sell you crippled files you own the crippled files, it's within your right to uncripple them. It _used_ to be within your rights of fair use to make copies of music and mix tapes and give them friends free of charge, however the current RIAA/MPAA friendly administration is helping to erode those rights, thanks Orrin!!!
My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
The GPL is "serious copyright of any kind", and we are protecting it, at least as well as the security keys do.
I am trolling
Are you trolling? I ask because you've conflated several issues which are utterly unrelated, and you besmirch "open source" as some sort of WareZ or SerialZ scheme. If you're not trolling, then it's clear you are ignorant of these subjects.
First of all, your first assertion--that "the wonderfulll world of open-source" somehow advocates stealing intellectual property is patently ludicrous. If you care to browse the mailing-list archives for nearly any open-source project, and ReactOS's in particular, you will find a very clear regard for copyright, such that any incoming code contributions are challenged to ensure no non-opensource code is accepted.
Second, you assert that opensource works have "no serious copyright of any kind." Forgive me for asking, but what the hell does that mean? Are you saying that copyright is somehow less valid when licensed under the GPL, when compared to run-of-the-mill garbage click-through or shrink-wrap "licenses"? If so, would you kindly back up this baloney with a factual example? In my experience, the GPL has received favorable enforcement when asserted against infringers in the past; is the same true for click-throughs?
Further, you seem to suffer under the delusion that authors of opensource software are the same individuals who "consider it legit to publish security keys, hacks to encryption algorythms" and so forth. This is utter garbage, again. I defy you to name a single ReactOS or Linux developer (credited by name in the source code) who is a WareZ kiddie.
Finally, the "repackaging" that the ReactOS team finds objectionable is only that this "Ekush" entity is merely removing attributions to the true authors, and redistributing ReactOS-derived software without adhering to the licensing terms under which ReactOS was distributed. I'm sure they could care less if Ekush properly forked the ReactOS code and released their own version while adhering to the ReactOS license, and might even support serious parallel efforts if done for a principled reason--the ability to code-fork is one well-known and universally-acknowldged BENEFITS of opensource. But what happened here is mere blatant piracy, with no attention heeded to the original license.
CLIFF NOTES: get your damn facts straight, stop attributing attitudes or positions to people which they never held, and learn the difference between opensource and warez, you tool.
at the very end where they define GPL
0 11 09.htm
http://www.thedailystar.net/2004/10/20/d4102016
I am truly ashamed and apologize on behalf of my countrymen.
That's right. I've decided that tomorrow I'm going to release a new operating system. It will be a POSIX-compliant OS that will have complete Linux compatibility. It's also going to have a great desktop GUI that is 100% compatible with KDE.
The package will be named FishIx and FDE.
Now, away to the FishCave! I've grepping to do if I'm going to get this done in time! Kernel.Org is the place to grab source, right?
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
when you could just implement the windoze APIs on top of the OS of your....hey, what about WINE???!!!!
WINE is not GPL
You're not proposing a racial theory here. Its relatively small country where power and wealth concentrated in a very small percentage of people. Surprise! A quick search on the net and you've found evidence, and there's plenty more. BTW- The UN has done a global survey measuring corruption in business in different countries. The US was "somewhat corrupt," with the Scandanvian countries being among the least corrupt.
Looks like their account has been suspended. Guess they'll have to stay home and play H2... -JerryLs
Ad Astra Per Asper
What you see here is a cry for equal enforcement of copyright law. If I can be stripped of my life savings and companies can be fined hundreds of millions of dollars and put out of business for copyright violations, then the people behind ekush should be forced to do as the current owners of the software demand. It just so happens that people who "own" GPL'd software are not as asinine when it comes to their demands, so the remedies are simple: release the code or pay the authors. You will find me recommending p2p music "theft".
Read Lessing's Free Culture for an understanding of how the radio, recording and movie industries all "pirate" content. The only way anyone could think the current copyright mess is legitimate is if they believe in a command economy as many of the "IP" rights are stripped from performers and composers in favor of price controls.
The GPL is a mechanism to undermine software copyrights and the closed source model. The makers of the GPL think those things are abusive, but were clever enough to make an instrument that relies on the power of copyright law. Use of free software directly ends the user's abuse by closed source companies but indirectly fixes copyright laws. When the revenue for abusive companies like Microsoft dries up, they will be less able to purchase laws for themselves and copyright laws can return to something less intrusive and dangerous.
Lessing's creative commons will do much the same thing for entertainment and all of this AM radio empire bullshit will be long forgoten as programmers, composers and performers all make livings without as many nasty middle men.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Where have you been? Microsoft has been stealing all sorts of innovational technologies for years. For example, they stole C/PM in '82 and branded it as "DOS". The only reason most computers don't run a C/PM-based O.S. today is because intellectual property laws were unjust back in the early 80s.
Deriving is not a problem. Distributing is (talking about the GPL in particular). You can use/destroy/mangle/mutilate to your hearts content, even withing the confines of a company... but if distributed publically, fee or not, you have to provide access to the source (for fee or not).
it could, but I highly doubt Windows could be killed in that way - How many YEARS could Microsoft give away Windows for, without Bill even noticing a dent in his fortune?
"Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
But to pick yet another (they tend to multiply like lice in Moria) in fact all that is required is that you have the offer. In truth, you only need be aware of the offer, since it is in fact required to be an offer valid for any third party, not any third party who has the binary.
The enemies of Democracy are
- Microsoft essentially stole the MICA variant of VMS 5 to make NT (they eventually paid some trivial amount of compensation to digital(*) just before it got Compaqted) which gave them a considerable head-start (and VMS was actually secure before it became NT, behold the passion-fingered power of Microsoft). For a fair while, NT and VMS were driver-compatible and several areas "spelling-error compatible".
- Microsoft probably had 20-50x as many FTE developers working on their codebase as you do on yours, and using dedicated top-of-the-wozza equipment and facilities for that.
- Microsoft have a patent portfolio and lawyers to help them work around or bargain past patent-the-wheel problems, but you don't.
- On the flip side, Microsoft also had Bill Gates buggering up their policy decisions for them.
No, I think ReactOS is doing all right, overall.(*) Microsoft did a similar thing to boost MS SQL Server up to a competitive level. Don't know what they're going to do to help that unit survive in a world where at least five competent FOSS SQL databases exist, several of which eat their lunch on performance and prerequisites, to say nothing of licence entanglements.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Well, you got it half-right anyhow. The problem isn't the guy modifying and distributing ReactOS - the problem is that he removed all attribution so that he could try to claim the work as his own, and attempted to distribute the software under a license other than the GPL.
Even in the Free Software world, that is violating copyright law, and stealing.
What's slow about it? Well, for one thing you're taking WAY too long to put all the bugs in. Also, I can't run my Bonzi Buddy and stuff yet! I mean, without those features there's NO WAY you could compare it to Windows!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
GPL violations make information *less* free; sharing copyrighted music and video makes information *more* free. The unifying principle is that information should be more free.
In addition, GPL violations such as this one have an element of plagiarism. Personally, I believe proper credit is the only moral right an author/artist has regarding his creations, and I doubt I'm the only one here who feels that way.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
It's possible they stole code to "enhance" its compatibility, but DOS itself was not a theft. Just the code that spit back the DR copyright on the IBM supplied machine in the small court battle for DR-DOS rights.
As to intellectual property laws, they didn't really enter into it. DR just didn't have the money required for a suit against a company the size of IBM.
But, all things aside, it seems to me that having enough code left over that the Digital Research copyright stayed intact really means we are running a C/PM based system today, doesn't it?
QDOS was made in 2 months of work by Seattle Computer Products (albiet after seeing CP/M). It was coded completely by hand with NO THEFT involved. Gates then purchased QDOS off of Seattle Computer products, rebranded it to MS-Dos and added a few improvements, then licensed to IBM.
Get your facts straight
I think it was the exclaimation marks more than anything. That and a great parent post to work from.
emt 377 emt 4
Well, let's be fair here. If Ekush wants to be exactly like Windows, do they not need to steal other's source code just like Microsoft did? I mean, just to be compatible or whatever...
Think of me when you shave your legs...