Slashdot Mirror
CherryOS Goes Open Source
netsniper writes "The CherryOS website now acknowledges a forthcoming alliance with Open Source Software! After going 'on hold' recently, a re-release of CherryOS is purported to be coming in May according to the site. This is great news on the surface, but let's see how it pans out. This move is probably a result of the many reviews of their product that set out to prove it was bogus."
It seems unlikely that they're doing it voluntarily. Maybe they came to an agreement with the people behind PearPC in order to keep the whole thing out of court?
Oh please. Can this whole shenanigan just end already? By now, it's already been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that CherryOS is a repackaged version of PearPC (google for "spiro multimax 3000"). Arben and MXS are using absolutely any tactic to get attention. He must have a serious ego problem.
Take off every sig. For great justice.
It's easy. All they had to do in order to avoid all the bad press is to start out with it being Open Source. The GPL states that you can charge for a product, or do whatever you like with it, just as long as your provide the source code. And if you use source code from another project (PearPC), then you have to acknowledge it.
It was so simple and easy, I don't know why they didn't Open Source Cherry OS from the begining.
It seems like this is all just a delay tactic for CherryOS to get it's code in line. I'm surprised that they didn't stay on hold for a while longer to gain more time. As far as the "Due to Overwhelming Demand," that's ridiculous. The entire OSS community has been up in arms about their crap. This is just them trying not to get sued, although it would be hilarious if they were actually legit... no comments there
Due to financial difficulties, the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off.
I'm confused, PearPC is already open source...
*scratches head*
Oh well, I guess they finally realized, if you can't beat them, join them.
This whole CherryOS thing has been completely stupid. Why do people think they can slap a different name on something and sell it, when it's already free?
Ubuntu, the way linux should be.
Try Ubuntu FREE! --
4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
Does this mean that CherryOS has already lost their license to use the source code from PearPC?
Can they just open source their "project" now? Is it not too late? Hasn't several developers permanantly revoked the GPL license from CherryOS so they can never use their code?
It smells more like a half-assed effort to calm down legal threats than anything.
The moment you see their words "popular demand" you know they're STILL trying to lie and get away with something.
If this is true, then the agreement sucks.
At the very least, it must include an admission of guilt and a formal apology, or some form of other punitive measures.
It seems they can *totally* get away with it now, and nobody will even know they did something wrong.
Don't let it happen.
How can you steal it. They only copied and modified the source, no theft here.
Move along, the parent is nothing but a TROLL!
Right. I'm an American with a logical mind and I've never understood why people in the U.S. use mm.dd.yyyy...makes no sense. Either yyyy.mm.dd or dd.mm.yyyy, please!
BenCurry.net
Assume the project starts up and hires some fly-by-night guy to design and build this system. He promises he can do it in four months for X amount of money.
This guy tries like hell to build the project, but gets stymied by some stuff. So he downloads PearPC and tries to figure out what he's doing wrong.
Eventually, he figures out that what he did wrong was promise something that nobody could deliver, so he panics and starts mucking around in PearPC to conceal its origin.
When the deadline hits, he sends them his "obfuscated" version of PearPC and collects his check. He runs off into the night hoping nobody ever finds out.
Meanwhile, the completely innocent company puts this project up for sale. The open source community raises hell. The company goes "OMG! WTF?" and yanks it off the market.
After some examination, the company decides that the only possible way to recover from this (according to their lawyers) is to GPL the project. Since it qualifies as a work made for hire, they own all the rights to the non-PearPC code, so they can license *that* however they like.
Just playing devil's advocate. Maybe the big bad company isn't the villain here; maybe it's just one crappy little ass-hat developer.
Microsoft cheerleader, blue flag waving, you got a problem with that?
That brings up an interesting point, actually. The website talks about it being an open source project, and they use the GNU logo on the page. From this, people can reasonably assume that it'd be GPL. But I don't think it actually says anywhere that it'd actually be GPL. They could have another trick up their sleeve
Obviously, as PearPC is GPL, legally CherryOS would have to be GPL, so I could be on an entirely wrong track here, but is there a form of open source license that prohibits forking?