Slashdot Mirror
Is Showmypc.com an Open Source Pretender?
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?"
"Where's ShowMySource.com?"
did you report them to SourceForge?
If it's original work, can't the copyright holder decide to close the source? If it doesn't contain anyone else's work that happens to be GPLd, I don't see a problem here.
Need more info...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
CVS http://showmypcssh.cvs.sourceforge.net/showmypcssh / is empty.
Whereas GotoMyPC is a serious business with a vested interest in keeping users' machines secure, this site has no such commitments, and as such it seems like a pretty bad idea to use it without being able to check the source code. Potential GPL violations aside, a significant reason that we need the source is to confirm that it does what they say it does. Without it, who knows what backdoors they could be offering; it's especially concerning since it's specifically designed to penetrate firewalls. Beware!
this program contains code that they don't want you to see, because they are a shell company for microsoft that is simply using the VNC platform to spy on people so they can report back to the government.
If you feel like the government is watching you, they're not. They're watching everyone! Stop BIG BROTHER!
You are if you distribute a binary version with your modifications.
They don't need to give public or cost-free access to the source. All that is required is that they give the source to their customers, for a reasonable copy and distribution fee, if they ask for it.
And as for VNC and friends, well, if they didn't change that code they don't need to give you the source either.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
...because the GPL only requires that an offer of source code be distributed along with the application. Have you purchased a copy of their commercial offering?
Please read the following from gnu.org's FAQ:
QUOTE
If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?
No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.
UNQUOTE
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
-- Pablo Picasso
Ah, another piece of commercial, proprietary software derived from VNC.
https://www.copilot.com/press/faq/
Here's a serious question: has Fog Creek ever given anything back to the open source community?
I'm *pretty* sure there's an established procedure for reporting GPL violations, and I'm *pretty* sure submitting a /. story griping about your experience with that software ain't it.
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
This is flame bait... this is not news and it's definately not the proper way to report a GPL violation. Are we really hurting for news submissions?
Regards, Ryan McAdams
How long did Fog Creek Copilot take to write?
The three programming interns wrote the beta version of Fog Creek Copilot in under two months.
[...]
How were the four interns selected for this project?
Internship postings were made to the Fog Creek software website, www.FogCreek.com as well as to CEO Joel Spolsky's blog, www.JoelonSoftware.com. Fog Creek Software also mailed applications to hundreds of students at top universities. The posts sought out those enrolled in a four year academic institution with preference to those between Junior and Senior year with top grades, a track record of success, top notch computer programming skills for the Software Development Interns, and coursework in marketing or business experience as well as programming experience for the Software Marketing Intern. 800 students from top universities applied and 4 were chosen.
From the FAQ. (emphasis added).
They removed the link to the sourceforge page.
And this is wrong how, seeing as they provide the source?
The source isn't enough for you?
Commercial. Proprietary. Yes, the magic words that get some people's blood to boil. You wield them well.
My question would be why you care? In case their VNC core comes from licensed software allowing a commercial derivate as a binary, there is no problem. I believe AT&T's core was GPL'ed so that would raise some questions, but it's possible that by "VNC core" they mean some VNC-compatible derivate with a compatible license. In that case, the devs of that core also specifically intended use of it like this, being more open than just for OSS devs to use. Yes, there is a "more open" than that. And those developers don't have an issue with this, and maybe just you not wanting to see a 100% free use of their code. And if it doesn't follow the license, there's a breach of license, and then that would indeed be bad.
But this is clearly an issue of whether licenses are followed, not about a company doing "good" or "bad". If they follow the license of the developers -- that is using the software like they specifically intended others to use it -- they are per definition doing good. At least unless if you disagree with how their VNC core devs chose their license.
If there's something I get annoyed about, it's not about companies properly using licenses, but people like you who try to impose a personal code of ethics on companies who only use the code the way the original devs intended it to.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
UltraVNC and UltraVNC "single click" can do just what you want, is greatly customizable, and completely free.
To boldly use to and too two times and get it right too! They're not gonna believe their eyes when they see it there!
Don't you dare complain about doing the minimum. If you want more than that, write your own license and start to use it instead of the GPL.
Yes, all they got was:
Doesn't seem that shabby...
Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
Comment removed based on user account deletion