Apple Delays Release of LGPL WebKit Code

jfruhlinger writes "Ever since Apple forked the KHTML project to create WebKit, the rendering engine at the core of Safari, the company has been a good open source citizen, releasing the code back to the community after updates. But that suddenly stopped in March, with no code releases for the last two updates to the iOS version of the browser, for reasons unknown. This might remind you of Google's failure to release the Honeycomb source code. But at least Google announced that it was holding the code back, and Android is under a license that allows for a delay; the LGPL'd WebKit isn't." Update: 05/09 21:21 GMT by S : Reader Shin-LaC points out that Apple has now released the relevant source code.

Comments

Apple: "Fuck it, we're evil"

[David Gerard]

CUPERTINO, Transylvania, Friday — After bricking unlocked iPhones, kicking applications off the iPhone store that might even slightly compete with iTunes in the far future, "delaying" the release of GPL source code and filing a wave of patents on basic well-known computer science, Apple Inc. today filed a Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission declaring that it was openly adopting Evil as a corporate policy.

"Fuck it," said Steve Jobs to an audience of soul-mortgaged thralls, "we're evil. But our stuff is sooo good. You'll keep taking our abuse. You love it, you worm. Because our stuff is great. It's shiny and it's pretty and it's cool and it works. It's not like you'll go back to a Windows Mobile phone. Ha! Ha!"

Steve Ballmer of Microsoft was incensed at the news. "Our evil is better than anyone's evil! No-one sweats the details of evil like Microsoft! Where's your antitrust trial, you polo-necked bozo? We've worked hard on our evil! Our Zune's as evil as an iPod any day! I won't let my kids use a lesser evil! We're going to do an ad about that! I'll be in it! With Jerry Seinfeld! Beat that! Asshole.”

"Of course, we're still not evil," said Sergey Brin of Google. "You can trust us on this. Every bit of data about you, your life and the house you live in is strictly a secret between you and our marketing department. But, hypothetically, if we were evil, it's not like you're going to use Bing. Ha! Ha! I'm sorry, that's my ‘spreading good cheer' laugh. Really."

DHS to the rescue?

[hweimer]

So we have a case of blatant copyright violation, which is even perpetrated for commercial gain. So I guess the DHS will step in and seize the apple.com domain as they have done before in similar cases, right?

Re:It's right here

[OverlordQ]

No, no it's not. That's WebKit, not Apple's version of WebKit.

Re:Seriously?

[Trufagus]

The d-evil is, as always, in the details.

Google released the GPL portion of Honeycomb (including kernel and userland), as per their obligation. The part of honeycomb they delayed is the part that they have exclusive ownership of. They have no obligation to release it but they claim that they will. People are only accepting that claim because of Google's track record on open source: Google creates tons of open-source projects and code.

With webkit, the situation is more complicated: Apple has added a ton to webkit but their code is based on KHTML and interspersed with other people's contributions. It would appear that they are legally obligated to release the code. The fact that they are holding back is consistent with the fact that Apple only releases what they absolutely must release. Perhaps they are now figuring out what that is?

Simple Explanation and Jumping to Conclusions

[UnknowingFool]

Am I the only to see a very simple explanation that the author has missed? To recap here is what the author is saying:

• WebKit is LGPL so updates should be released
• Apple has released iOS 4.3, 4.3.1,4.3.2, and 4.3.3 without any updates to WebKit
• Therefore Apple is holding back WebKit updates.

Am I the only one to see the major flaw in logic? iOS updates may include Safari updates which may include WebKit updates but iOS updates are not necessarily WebKit updates. If you look at the actual 4.3 updates that the author describes, the vast majority of changes have nothing to do with Safari. Even if they did, remember Safari is WebKit + Apple's browser code just like Chrome = WebKit + Google's code. The few changes around Safari seem to imply fixes to Safari not WebKit. Also if the author did any deep analysis, in 4.2, Apple updated Safari to use WebKit 533.17.9 whereas the newest stable version if WebKit is 534.20.

Re:download page

[Mr. Slippery]

One of the big issues companies have with FOSS is software patients.

Patents are not relevant here. If there were a patent issue, they couldn't use it at all, closing the source has no effect.