Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is Showmypc.com an Open Source Pretender?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the show-us-the-source dept.

shaitand writes "When looking for a remote support application that penetrates firewalls and can be initiated by my clients with a couple of clicks, I came across Showmypc.com. It was a standalone executable but looked like it would work and best of all it was open source. The only thing I didn't like was the interface, so I went to check out the Sourceforge page. I noticed a substantial problem: CVS is empty and the source on the download page is for the 2.6 version. The version of the executable is 3.53. I mailed the developers that they needed to distribute their modified SSH client and VNC source to be in compliance with the GPL license. They said they didn't modify those programs and ignored my request for the current source code. So I ask again, if this is a GPL'ed application; where is the source?"

2 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. Spolesky did the same by gerrysteele · · Score: 0, Troll

    https://www.copilot.com/ from those fog creek losers does exactly the same thing. they say they allow you to download their VNC modifications... but just try compiling them .... you can't

  2. Re:GPL doesn't require releasing the source by pclminion · · Score: 0, Troll

    What the GPL states is that if you provide someone with a binary, you must also provide them with the source on demand, for no more than the reasonable cost of doing so. It does not say "unless you are the copyright holder." If you refuse to do so, they would have to sue you to force you to perform what you agreed to when you licensed your code under the GPL

    Sue you for what? Deciding what you want to do with your own god damn intellectual property? Good luck with that. Guess what: the GPL is a LICENSE, not a CONTRACT. Fuck, works to precisely that effect are RIGHT THERE in the license. Try reading it.

    (IANAL) the fact that you are the copyright holder does not give you a pass on fulfilling the terms of the license

    Good thing YANAL. You're batshit crazy, as well as wrong.

    When you provide someone with a GPL-licensed binary, you have entered into a license agreement to also provide the source, and that is true even if you are the copyright holder.

    Nope. Back to your padded cell, now. Who let you out?