Slashdot Mirror
Possible GPL Violation?
An Anonymous Coward wrote to inform us of a new Chinese Linux distro, Blue Point Linux 1.0RC, which includes support for Chinese characters. The bad news is the developers, who have based their effort on Red Hat's are alleged to have forgotten to include the modified kernel source. Coward asks: "Don't they violate the GPL?". Some people over at the BP Forum apparently have some thoughts. What do you think: is this against the terms of the GPL? (Can someone translate this?)
I think this distro is done by the people in your beloved Taiwan, which makes your chips. Doh!
There aren't that many Anti-Chinese remarks here...and those that are, have already been moderated down to off-topic (since the TOPIC is a violation of the GPL).
Werd.
1) You people? You have the nerve to criticize and use the phrase "you people?" 2) "Nuke the commie bastards," means "nuke the COMMIE bastards." (and whoever else is standing in the area)
As unpalatable as this release may be to some, it is still a release. If it's development is halted here and no source is released and the group is disbanded, it is still a release.
This means that it _will_ be used. GPL or no GPL.
Thats my 5c
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
This has turned into a further example of moderator abuse. Look, it no longer matters what a person says. If they are no towing the Slashdot line of "GPL RULZ!", they are going to be labeled and troll or flamebait. And it is even worse when someone criticises the moderators.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Yes but look at what he was responding to. I calmy and without flaming pointed out that what the person I was responding to said was not true and in fact was unfairly moderated. Still, I take a 2-point hit (offtopic, troll) because I chose to stand up and say that the moderators are wrong and a misdeed should be undone.
This is simple proof that Slashdot moderation does not work.
"This can take the form of pirating, industrial and governmental espionage (anyone who thinks the Chinese haven't been spying here is badly mistaken"
1. Are there no pirates in developed nations?
2. Do you think that we (the US) and Britain do not engage in "governmental espionage"? How do you think we found out about their alleged spying activities? Anyone who thinks that America haven't been spying on other countries is badly mistaken.
THIS is an important thing, smelling so bad I can hardly breath. I went to the website and poked around and saw "antionline says this, happyhacker that about our product" and decided to start up the old whois.
Seems to me that if your story is true, there is another pile of people who would happily use this to make someone's day bad.
UUH, wait, it gets better (from the website):
High-tech author and engineer Carolyn Meinel, whose Happy Hacker Web site has been hacked on several occasions, commented, "Hackers wanting to take down my Web site are out of luck. These digital vandals, who have recently hacked several prominent corporate and government Web sites, continue their onslaught against my site, but they've been unsuccessful since I've implemented BRICKHouse."
whois www.3rdpig.com:
Registrant:
Systems Advisory Group Enterprises, Inc (SAGE) (3RDPIG-DOM)
2201 Civic Circle, Suite 1001
Amarillo, TX 79109
US
Domain Name: 3RDPIG.COM
Administrative Contact:
Barreras, Rhonda (RB6088) rhonda@SAGE-INC.COM
806-354-8185 (FAX) 806-354-8366
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Knight, Chris (CK5577) chris@SAGE-INC.COM
806-354-8185 (FAX) 806-354-8366
Billing Contact:
Geiger, Lynn (LG4869) lynng@SAGE-INC.COM
806-354-8185 (FAX) 806-354-8366
Record last updated on 24-Mar-99.
Record created on 11-Jul-97.
Database last updated on 11-Oct-99 03:52:52 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
DNS1.WURLD.NET 206.61.52.11
DNS2.WURLD.NET 206.61.52.12
and whois www.happyhacker.org
Registrant:
Happy Hacker (HAPPYHACKER3-DOM)
PO Box 1520
Cedar Crest, NM 87008-1520
US
Domain Name: HAPPYHACKER.ORG
Administrative Contact:
Meinel, Carolyn (CM5166) cpm@RT66.COM
505.281.9675 (FAX) 505.281.9269
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Knight, Chris (CK5577) chris@SAGE-INC.COM
806-354-8185 (FAX) 806-354-8366
Billing Contact:
Meinel, Carolyn (CM5166) cpm@RT66.COM
505.281.9675 (FAX) 505.281.9269
Record last updated on 23-Mar-99.
Record created on 29-Oct-97.
Database last updated on 11-Oct-99 03:52:52 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
DNS1.WURLD.NET 206.61.52.11
DNS2.WURLD.NET 206.61.52.12
The GPL is more balanced. It says "You want to use my software? Then give me the same license terms I gave you." That says quid-pro-quo to me. The BSD license, in contrast, says "use me and don't give anything back". That's hardly a quid-pro-quo.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I guess I don't know as much about the GPL as I thought I did
Does the US give a shit?
As far as I know, the US goverment executes people for crime. Isn't that breaking the human rights? I don't think I can mention a country entitled to saying, that they don't break at least one or two of the basic human rights.
-----------------------------------
I hate to admit it...but it's threads like these that make me happy I'm not using linux right now
---
Yep, your right, not only does the happyhacker.org website use the brickhouse software-SAGE (or Brickhouse) actually hosts the site on their network as well (something I am not entirely happy about)-but that keep telling me that it is only to provide an 'excellent testing grounds' for their software-as much as this woman gets attacked each day (and for good reason) I don't blame them. However-as you pointed out, it does make the situation stinky-bad publicity. But I can assure you, telling you from personal knowledge-that Carolyn Moniel nor anti-online has had NOTHING to do with the development of Brickhouse. (thank god)
but you forget... BSD gets stuff back. The idea is that it helps the entire community, closed and open source. Sure, some one can just take, but IMO, the result is generaly quite amazing.
1. BSD group creates open source program
2. corperation takes code, and to create a product worth the paying for, they add numerous enhancements.
3. As the company still gets free code from the origionators, they want to see the innovation. They wamt to keep an edge, though. So, they give back big fixes, a few enhancements, etc.
Thus, people get the same.. better quality open source code, and for those that its not good enough for, they have a company with support and more features. The two support each other, and neither is persecuted, both benefit.
What about those so called 'greedy' companies who don't contribute back? Lets say MS didn't contrbute anything when it used the BSD networking code. Here.. everyone using Windows benefitted. They got stable, proven, high quality code that makes Windows work. With all the complaints towards Windows, is it better to have another MS bit of code, or proven code that (I believe Linux uses/used) and *many* others have used.
The GPL is a fine license, but the BSDL is not at all bad, and if people wish to talk about supporting the community, the BSD supports everyone. However, GPL is more political (IMHO) and its extreme attitude (that of not supporting propitary/closed code) definately gets media.
This all is a touchy issue. If I can get my miniuns together, a project will form in the next couple of weeks that's goal is to help clear confusion, FUD, etc. of various open source licenses (and, to help.. everything will be footnoted to remove bias). A few people are already offered help too.
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
BEFORE COLUMBUS GOT TO AMERICA AND WIPED OUT THE INDIANS AND RAPED THEIR WOMEN, CHINA WAS THE MOST POWERFUL COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY THE WORLD, AND THATS A FACT YOU DUMB PIECE OF SHIT!!!!!! THEN WHEN THE WHITE DEVIL GOT MORE POWERFUL, HE KEPT US DOWN, BUT NOW WE'RE COMING BACK!!! WATCH YOUR BACK !!!!!
I'm sure Bruce already knows this, but there ARE reasons to choose not only the LGPL, but also BSD and other licenses.
:)
Of course if Free Software is your one and only goal, GPL is the way to go, but some projects have more complicated goals.
The PNG development team want first and foremost to promote the use of PNG instead of GIF or BMP or whatever. This purpose is best served by making it legal for EVERYONE to use their code.
I'd encourage anyone seeking wide-ranging support for a new protocol or format to release under LGPL or 2-clause BSD.
If you support Free Software you can make a GPL'ed application which demonstrates the potential of your format, but your reference implementation should not be GPL if you want industry-wide support.
NB Despite FREE availability of libpng, Adobe spent many developer hours on an inferior PNG codec for PotatoShop. Sometimes proprietary software strives to be WORSE
know your role and shut your mouth, trailor trash
You are a moron. 1. What do I have to say about a train wreck? I'll tell you right now: It's a terrible shame. And that's what everyone else has to say too. It's not a topic worthy of discussion. 2. The GPL has always been a topic that people have wanted to debate. It's interesting, new, and controversial. 3. When the GPL is violated, the entire GNU and Linux communities of ~10 million people is attacked. It's not minor. It's not uninteresting. It's important, and it needs to stop. 4. If you don't care, DON't FUCKING POST. No one put a gun to your head and forced you to even read the fucking artical, let alone fucking make a sophmoric post that was, above all else, mostly off topic. 5. I would rather have all of my personal posessions stolen than see the GPL dead. -Dave Turner, pissed off AC of convinience
This is why the rest of the world hates Americans.
Because it was an attempt to start a flame war. I think posters need to be more informed and think things through before they post.
Well good luck enforcing this one.
All commercial software is readily available in China, India and Thailand over the counter as pirated cd's, openly for sale.
When you buy a computer they ask you if you want a
real copy of window's or should they just slap on
for you for free.
In practical terms how can you enforce the GPL
when they can't enforce ANY software licenses
in these countries?
Also, IANAL but would the GPL have any validity under the chinese legal system? Who knows if it violates any kind of tenets of the legal system there, it's certainly never been tested.
What kind of international laws apply now for stolen property? How would a case be waged if someone in China cracked a bank in the US?
- passion
Why are you all picking on Commodore 64 users anyway?
But if a corporation had does that... all of the developers wouldn't have to fight the corporation individually, they could combine their suits into a class action lawsuit. Then they could combine their resources and hire any one of the OJ defense team =)
Um, you're the first one to bring these points up. Nobody who posted before you was China bashing at all as far as I could see.
/peter
That guy in the T shirt was Swift Griggs, one of the guys who actually threw her out of DefCon-it should be pretty obvious why they were in an argument...
Skepticism can definately be overlooked now-a-days, even when I use "".....
Yeah, he doesn't link to squishdot or something. Proves its just a freeloading rip off artist.
IIRC, Bruce bought squishdot their domain name.
Go back to that trailer park you were born in, eat your mayonnaise sandwich and fuck your sister
Yeah, he doesn't link to squishdot or something. Proves its just a freeloading rip off artist. IIRC, Bruce bought squishdot their domain name.
White people like to make up their own rules. They don't particularly have a sense of community. That's why they're a bunch of backwards people. They're often quite dirty and smelly too. They live in trailer parks and often don't wash themselves for weeks on end. Oh, did I mention they like to exterminate entire races of human beings? They do that too. I saw something on the History Channel where these white guys came to this continent called America and proceeded to entirely eliminate the Native Americans. The inhuman bastards don't even have the decency to acknowledge they're wrongdoing. Needless to say that knowing history has forever colored the way I see white people. I despise them. Just my opinion, too.. of course.
Haha you are so brainwashed by media propaganda.. congratulations you are officially braindead.
Umm can anyone think of something that China has made that has made it commercially or open sourced
I had to think for ages and came up with nothing
Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject.
The chinese crew can save themselves by releasing the source immediatly and appolagising. If they don't I think this is a clear violation of GPL
---
Killroy Woz Here
why do you mark up posts with extremely boring shit but funny one liners you mark with -1 as being offtopic. get a life
I'll admit I only took a glance, but not including src is by no means a violation of the GPL. I can release hundreds of programs w/o src, and do so rightfully under the GPL...the GPL simply states that src must be made available per request.
Now, if you ask for the mods and they say nay, THEN it's a violation.
of ideas that moves the people around /.
Have you looked at the product, does it make any sense? I doubt it, and the gpl infringment seems very clear if they really don't provide source code and follow the gpl. Looking on their business modell they will never be able to. Hey Bruce, if you ever looked for an easy target, they seem to be.
I tried to find out more from their website, but the marketing bubble there didn't describe more than a normally configured internet host should accomplish. (i.e. Web server with Custom Gateway Interface (CGI) server-side programming,SMTP anti spamming - Restricts access to mail server from unauthorized users sic!)
But look at an article at zdnet He ripped out Linux's security kernel, rewrote it "180 degrees" and made access dependent on processes running on the system, rather than on the user.
The president and CTO of brickhouse tells such brilliant security enhancing ideas like not to have you business data on your webserver or not to start your webserver as root. (first link on the links section)
And following some link at the links-section, I found a story (at www.amarillonet.com) where the newspaper had to print a correction cause cpm had given some unprofable statements about some hackers in order to promote the product.
If I was SAGE, I would get some other promoters.
Quoting the post by "Devin" in the BP Forum with English translation added (switch to GB Chinese in your browser to view the funny characters below):
Message ID: 2146457931
Ìá ½ Õß : devin
Message By: devin
±± ¾© ʱ ¼ä : 10/8/99 9:50 pm
Beijing Time: 10/8/99 9:50 pm
Ö÷Ìâ£ÕâÀïÊǼ¼ÊõÌÖÂÛ×é£ÓǼ¼ÊõÎÄÕÂ
Subject: This is a technical forum, any non-technical discussion message is not welcomed.
ÈçÓÐÆäËûÎÊÌâ£ÉÒÔÀÐÅ admin@openunix.org
Ǽ¼ÊõÎÊÌâ£ÉÄܱɾý£ÇÒ×öÈÎÎÍÖ£
If there are other issues, mails could be sent to admin@openunix.org
Non-technical problems may be deleted and without prior notice.
=====
Doing a Whois Query gives the following info:
Registrant:
openunix.org (BLUEPOINTLINUX-DOM)
6-704 , #1 huafa bei road
shenzhen, guangdong 518031
CN
Domain Name: BLUEPOINTLINUX.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Dun, Devin (YD41) szdevin@PUBLIC.SZPTT.NET.CN
86-755-3352090 (FAX) 86-755-3352090
Billing Contact:
Dun, Devin (YD41) szdevin@PUBLIC.SZPTT.NET.CN
86-755-3352090 (FAX) 86-755-3352090
Record last updated on 04-Aug-99.
Record created on 04-Aug-99.
Database last updated on 11-Oct-99 03:52:52 EDT.
-----
So the poster in the forum message above is very likely to be the admin. himself.
=====
As far as I can see, BP (or Network Studio) is out trying to make some money from this (see the order info).
This is a disgrace. They are trying to copy RedHat's commercial motives but not even a little of their corporate conscience. :-(
Well, let's just hope they will reverse this regrettable course of action. If we do not hear from them soon, I suggest that the Linux communities (especially those in countries with substantial Chinese-specking population like Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore) could band together and build a better Chinese distribution than BP. Then host it with the source on the web.
I've heard that Yahoo is entering the Chinese market. Maybe they would be interested in providing this hosting service. Well, even if they're not interested, there should be some Chinese ISPs on the mainland who would. *evil grin*
*Sigh sigh*
Microsoft is probably laughing right now that they are not the only ones having this problem in China.
I wonder who is currently having a larger market share in the pirated CDs market in China... Linux or Microsoft? Hmm... ;-) Maybe BP would just crash and burn in China like the other legitimate software.
Anon Cow
"GPL does not stand for Generally Poor License. It must be defended at all costs."
Hey Bruce, if does violate the GPL, what can anyone do about it? Who would be the appropiate person to initiate legal proceedings?
You know, if it is a violation, we could TELL them about it and ASK them to release the source, rather than just go straight into litigation.
nope, see my post somewhat down, they clearly state that in pcweek:
Larsen's idea: Change the OS security model and take advantage of Linux's open source code. He ripped out Linux's security kernel, rewrote it "180 degrees" and made access dependent on processes running on the system, rather than on the user
Haha, great idea, take advantage of open source...
iii) What is 'reasonable cost'? Could a company legitamately claim that the cost of production of a one-off CDROM or DVDROM is of the order of $100,000 and charge that for the source? After all, commercially pressed CDs are the norm for software distribution.
$100,000 is not a reasonable cost. At the most you could charge for the media and an hour's labor by an operator to write the medium.
...so that would be $2 for the media, and $1 for the labour.
Context is everything. Bruce used a very common English construction which I had no trouble understanding. The word "but" does not always mean an exception...
This presupposes I care whether you read what I write. And of course I'm wasting my time; what else does one do on Slashdot?"It's long been a practiced for lesser developed nations to try to bootstrap themselves into the modern world by acquiring technology hook or crook from more developed nations. "
It's also long been practiced by the modern world to try to make themselves even richer by exploiting lesser developed nations, by paying sweatshop workers less than human wages to churn out luxury products for the pleasure of the modern world (not to mention outright enslavement and other forms of bullying).
Fair return I think.
wow.. take a minute to think for a second. The GPL doesn't require the code be with the product, but be available when requested, at a fee of whatever is needed to pay transportation costs (or free). That means if these guys simply put an ftp up with the modified code, and let you know its availalbe, they shouldn't have a problem. Here's my proof.. (I really hate /. always jumping the gun..). From v1 of the GPL (cuz I was just looking at it.. thanks RMS and neelakanth (is it neel?) for finding v1 for me)...
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a portion or derivative of it, under Paragraph 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Paragraphs 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Paragraphs 1 and 2 above; or,
b) accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party free (except for a nominal charge for the cost of distribution) a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Paragraphs 1 and 2 above; or,
c) accompany it with the information you received as to where the corresponding source code may be obtained. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form alone.)
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
ROTFL... It sounds just like them doesn't it! Talk about bringing back memories.
If we are to free this software. We only need one free copy of the source code, and then we can copy that one for free because It's GPL (GPL is inheritied)
Oops, I take it back. Obviously /.'s filtering works pretty well. I had my threshold set to '1', and missed all of the ignorant China bashing.
/peter
After you have gotten a copy of the binary software, you must see if there is source code for all GPL software, or if there is a clear written offer for the source code distributed along with the binary software (perhaps on the CD itself). If neither of these exist, the GPL is being violated.
Then, you should contact the manufacturer and ask for source code (for the kernel modifications, or whatever). Then if you don't get the source code, that's a GPL violation too.
Don't listen to anyone who calls it "whining" to protest a GPL violation. Remember that the Linux kernel and applications are copyrighted property of some thousands of contributors, and they have a right to enforce their license, which requires that source code be distributed upon request.
Under the GPL, if source code is not distributed with the product, the distributor of the binary code must give source code to anyone who requests it, not just people who have received the binary code. But we must see a copy of the binary product to determine conclusively whether or not source code is distributed.
Thanks
Bruce Perens
Bruce Perens.
Seriously though, I think we're a little too tense when it comes to potential GPL violations. I could see it being rather difficult to verify every single package on a distribution and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. This could very well have been an accidental oversight and will probably get cleared up pretty quick. Not, as someone pointed out, that we could do much about it if it's not...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Hmm, I mean this is illegal at the end of the day. Not that I have faith in the American legal system (ha!), but I think the DoJ wouldn't look to favorably on this. No to mention the bad press it would cause among millions (how many are you guys? :) of sysadmins...
-
__
Comment submitted. There will be a delay before you understand what you posted.
Whereas the USA spawned such culinary delights as McDonald's and Burger King. Hmm.. I once heard of this group of american kids who dressed up in trench-coats and shot up their school. all americans are clearly homocidal maniacs. All us europeans are slave-traders. Oh.. ever saw a cow being slaughtered in a kosher (sp?) way?
ah.. and they say eloquence is dead. Thank you for your wise words, please post again.
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
Somehow I think that if all the lawyers from ms, the sba, and every other software company in the world can't do anything about the obvious IP violations in china's public sector, you'd have a little difficulty arguing over the finer points of the GPL in the private sector.
ROTFL...
It sounds just like them doesn't it!
Talk about bringing back memories.
Corel kind of started this thing with it's 'closed betatest'. They claim they don't need to deliver source code yet, since their dist isn't publicly available yet.
I read in one of the follow-ups that BluePoint refers to Corel wrt not delivering source code (yet?). These large scale so called closed betatest blur the distinction between private use (in-house) which doens't need delivering source code and open distribution which does require it.
Should the GPL maybe be updated to draw a sharp line in this area, e.g. by explicitly requiring that any use, also so called tests, outside a company (i.e. by any non-employee) is considered to be non-private, and must be accompanied by source code?
Ok, so taking the Linux kernel for an example of a GPLed (or whatever the past participle is) work, if someone distributes a binary only copy of the kernel and refuses to give out source (a clear violation of section 3):
i) Who is the complainant in the trial? As you point out, the kernel is copyright by thousands of people and the scope of this copyright is very blurred (does someone really own the one line of code they changed). Does this mean that the entire group of copyright owners have to sue 'en masse'?
ii) Does this mean that you have to give back the binary because they had no right to distribute in the first place (ie you are doing yourself harm by complaining)?
iii) What is 'reasonable cost'? Could a company legitamately claim that the cost of production of a one-off CDROM or DVDROM is of the order of $100,000 and charge that for the source? After all, commercially pressed CDs are the norm for software distribution.
I don't want to say that GPL is a bad thing, just wondering what the fine mecahnics of it are.
John Wiltshire
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
...is no excuse. Nuke em.
An even better question:
Given that kind of market (windows support for chinese is pretty lame, all things considered) wouldn't this be good for Linux even IF it violated the GPL?
things to ponder.
Ummm... who the hell appointed you as my spokesperson? I'm a member of the Linux community. I run Linux servers. I convert work servers from NT to Linux. I've converted friends. I don't feel "attacked".
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
With all the inflammatory posting going on here, the first vaguely reasonable post I see gets marked down two points for being off-topic?
Get a grip, guys. Try and show _some_ sense of impartiality.
And what of the Chinese slaughter in Tibet? Or the Japanese slaughter of Koreans? Or the tribal slaughters in Rwanda? etc. etc. I think you'll find plently of examples of non-white attrocities if you _really_ study history (or even current events). Your anger at these horrid crimes is valid, but you can't blame all the problems of the world on Westerners / white people.
moderation at its best.. then again, is that a good thing?
If you don't think so, then browse at -1. That's what it's there for.
Thirdpig company (http://www.3rdpig.com) is proposing a modified Linux, which couldn't be done without modifying the kernel. They don't provide ANY source or diff. How many companies are cheating like this ?
YEAH! Nuke the commies, I'll be in on that. There are waaaay too many of them.
Ah well, it was moderated down...
Why though?
I guess the moderators have no idea who I was talking about..
Unfortunately you seem to have misunderstood my purpose in posting.. I"m just trying to show ineffective these generalizations are.. Just for the record though, there is no "slaughter" of Tibetans by Chinese. Tibetan independence is an issue, but slaughter is not.
It's not your copyright being violated, is it? What amount of GPL code have you written? It's the developers that are being attacked.
Of course, if you has a little understanding of th big picture, you'd realise that in the long run, you wouldn't be able to convert NT to Linux without a large licensing fee, because the free Linux of today would be embraced, extended and extinguished, while Microsoft or Sun charge you through the nose for "their new" OSes at $300 a license.
--------
"I already have all the latest software."
the name openlinux.org is mentioned many times on their main page.(The email addresses all go there) and if you look up the domain registration, you'll see that at least the ppl who registered the domain name is from caldera. I wonder how Caldera is related with BP?
%whois openlinux.org
[rs.internic.net]
The Data in Network Solutions' WHOIS database is provided by Network
Solutions for information purposes, and to assist persons in obtaining
information about or related to a domain name registration record.
Network Solutions does not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a
WHOIS query, you agree that you will use this Data only for lawful
purposes and that, under no circumstances will you use this Data to:
(1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail
(spam); or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes
that apply to Network Solutions (or its systems). Network Solutions
reserves the right to modify these terms at any time. By submitting
this query, you agree to abide by this policy.
Registrant:
Caldera, Inc. (OPENLINUX4-DOM)
240 West Center Street
Orem, UT 84057
US
Domain Name: OPENLINUX.ORG
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Orcutt, David (DO331) edo@CALDERASYSTEMS.COM
(801) 523-7143
Billing Contact:
Cooper, Doug (DC1630) doug@CALDERA.COM
(801) 226-1675
Record last updated on 03-Aug-98.
Record created on 03-Aug-98.
Database last updated on 10-Oct-99 10:17:35 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS.CALDERA.COM 207.179.18.1
NS2.CALDERA.COM 207.179.18.252
Of course, I have not seen the product and will need to examine it along with someone who can read Chinese before I can say for sure that the GPL's being violated.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
ok, i browsed through the bp forum and only found one thread relating to the GPL violation. here's a rough translation: ( the words in parentheses are added by myself ) title: i'm very dissapointed... name: blue the kernel source being close-source already voilates the GPL. the chinesenization technology is for "bp linux" only is also a bad since a lot of people like mandrake, openlinux, slackware, turbolinux, redhat, debian ... no to mention that you have promised (opensource) before... ok i know promises are not enforced by law, and doing opensouce in china is very difficult, but i believe the only way to continue the development is to play by the opensource rules. is making some rpm ( for other distributions ) really so hard? how about the CLE project in taiwan? they are also very complete. bp is really the most techanically suited chinese solution right now, and i don't want to see it being ruined by short-sightedness. title: Re. i'm very dissapointed. name: hahalee yeah, look at CLE 0.9 -- already a few hundred Megabytes. A lot need to be modified in a distribution, like the hz de/coding in Pine, debug in kmail and system scripts etc... we can't depend on other distributors to maintain the packages. anyway, if you like the distribution like the preview version, feel free to continue using it. about opensource, what we promised was to include source in the release version. this is just a relatively stable debug version. the opensource theory ... (ok, there's some rambling here and i'm tired of translation ). ------------------------------------------------- so basically i think this is just like the Corel Beta version thing. ghost already left a message in bp forum informing the developers that they have made slashdot headline from GPL violation. i'm sure this will be resolved very soon.
I think this distro is done by the people in your beloved Taiwan
Which makes it China according to both China and the US.
ok, i browsed through the bp forum and only found
... no to mention that you have
... (ok, there's some rambling here and
- -
one thread relating to the GPL violation. here's
a rough translation: ( the words in parentheses
are added by myself )
title: i'm very dissapointed...
name: blue
the kernel source being close-source already
voilates the GPL. the chinesenization
technology is for "bp linux" only is also a
bad since a lot of people like mandrake,
openlinux, slackware, turbolinux, redhat,
debian
promised (opensource) before... ok i know
promises are not enforced by law, and doing
opensouce in china is very difficult, but i
believe the only way to continue the
development is to play by the opensource rules.
is making some rpm ( for other distributions )
really so hard? how about the CLE project in
taiwan? they are also very complete.
bp is really the most techanically suited
chinese solution right now, and i don't want
to see it being ruined by short-sightedness.
title: Re. i'm very dissapointed.
name: hahalee
yeah, look at CLE 0.9 -- already a few hundred
Megabytes. A lot need to be modified in a
distribution, like the hz de/coding in Pine,
debug in kmail and system scripts etc... we can't
depend on other distributors to maintain the
packages. anyway, if you like the distribution
like the preview version, feel free to continue
using it.
about opensource, what we promised was to include
source in the release version. this is just a
relatively stable debug version. the opensource
theory
i'm tired of translation ).
-----------------------------------------------
so basically i think this is just like the Corel
Beta version thing. ghost already left a message
in bp forum informing the developers that they
have made slashdot headline from GPL violation.
i'm sure this will be resolved very soon.
- the generosity of corperate america/the world? (call me a cynic, but i don't think so)
- no one has gotten around to it yet?
- the fear of the linux community?
As stated above it doesn't seem to hard (only some time and money required) to make the GPL fairly useless. Are lawyers the only/most effective/best method for enforcemnt? Or is the fear of the wrath of the linux community enough?just my 2e-2$
-Wiggin
"I don't need a compass to tell me which way the wind shines." - Mr. Furious, Mystery Men
Now here's a problem for you all. Suppose the chinese govn't (or ANY) "steals" the source code, changes it to their liking, and then either sells it, or gives it away, but without the code. Whatta gonna do, sue 'em ??? ya right....
No need for apologies. I kind of figured the problem was something along those lines. Unfortunately, most typos aren't that confusing. ;) Thanks for the clarification.
And congratulations. =)
~ Kish
Copyright violation is not theft; it is copyright violation. The idea that using someone else's code is stealing is antithetical to the idea of free software.
Please note: I didn't say it was desirable or morally defensible.
Third pig has been violating the GPL for quite some time now. www.thirdpig.com... this was posted before but with an incorrect URL.
Why the hell my original comment get marked as flamebait? I made a perfectly valid point. Just because I posted AC?
as a commercial software developer, what reason do i have to use GPL stuff? the world simply dosen't work on free software now, and ultimately there may be no path from where we are now to a world with plenty of perfect GPL software.
GPL, as opposed to BSD, LGPL et cetera, provides the worst sort of incompatibility: it does not, and will never work with the commercial software distribution model. programmers who simply want to have their stuff *used* should licence under a less restrictive licence than GPL.
-sh_
Interested in learning Chinese or Japanese? check out Chinese/Japanese-English Dictiona
IANAL (honest, I'm not), but I think one would back me on this. Fortunately or unfortunately, it comes down to the most anal wording considerations of the contract. It is an actual written contract and supersedes what an employer thinks it ought to mean, and particularly it supersedes what RMS _wanted_ it to mean.
As such, the contract makes absolutely no distinction regarding employees whatsoever. You yourself gave me one of the final keys to the probable outcome of this in court, when you apparently talked to a lawyer and learned that distribution was from 'one legal entity to another legal entity'. Now, corporations might want to write their OWN contracts (and have) to lay claim to the IP of their employees, but they don't have the power to stop a person being a legal entity just because that person is an employee. Therefore, it looks like 'distribution' within a company remains totally subject to the GPL's provisions regarding distribution, because the GPL says _nothing_ about 'unless it's a beta' or 'unless it's within a company that wants to preserve its intellectual property'.
I don't think this is an accident. I think RMS wanted it this way. So would I. His license is a subtle and direct way of preserving lines of communications over source code, and to make special cases where you don't have to share defeats the purpose. It's written so there are no loopholes regarding that, but it is also written to not be too unmanageable for the source writer. The basic rule remains "binaries == source == complete rights under the contract", and is quite clear, concerning itself with no other issues at all. That's a strength and gives the contract focus.
The Taiwanese don't consider themselves part of China. In fact, Taiwan is one of the very few democracies in southeast asia. Calling the Taiwanese Commies is not correct.
anyway, I've seen Chinese versions of Red Hat and Turbolinux before. What's new about Bluepoint?
dai wai
I didn't notice any listings on Net& FreeBSD pages, but OpenBSD, the youngest of the group, does have a list. This is not for contributing code, but of money, equipment, and services. Not only do the companies praise OpenBSD when asked (ie, NYTimes artcle), but they do help in more than code.
http://www.openbsd.org/donations.html
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
They must supply the source in machine readable form. I wouldn't call a faxed printout machine readable. The letter would only be a possible way if it's accompanied by a CD/whatever with the source on it.
Non-internet source code distribution could also legitimately include shipping costs. So you'd have three elements: media, labor/handling and shipping. The media and shipping costs are tough to pull highway robbery for, you can easily find the cost of a CD-R and a DHL letter pack in the market from which the distributor is distributing from. If they deviate too far from that amount, it would never hold up in court.
The labor/handling charges they've got a little more flexibility with. If the average hourly wage is 6USD for a technician, and they charge 300USD for labor, again no court would accept it.
----
----
Open mind, insert foot.
/*COUGH*/
GNU Project -- started in 1984
http://www.gnu.org/
xBSD -- based on Net/2 -- Released 1991
(or optimistically Net/1 -- 1989)
http://www.netbsd.org/Misc/history.html
NB: None of the *current* BSD projects started until 1993.
So hows about you f*** off and stop spreading FUD.
GNU/GPL predates any of the BSD projects by half a decade. Who started the trend?
Sadly, whenever you see a post saying "nuke the commiez, f*ing bastards' it's almost invariably a teenage american boy.
You may not like it, but it's true.
dave
No! Bad, bad! I live on the west coast, within range of their ICBMs.
Who's the moron now? Oh! Wait!! No, no, Dave, you are right, you work and I'll just use it all. Yeah!
The most logic solution to this problem might be, to try and talk to the people making Blue Point Linux, and ask them whether they do distribute the source code. If they don't, it is quite clearly a problem, that someone needs to do something about.
And, for all the junk about communist China or whatever: Why should that affect whether or not people should follow the GPL? I don't think it has a paragraf stating "This does not need to be accepted in China." So, why the fuzz?
Rune Broberg / Mihtjel
-----------------------------------
We incorporate GPL code into product every day with no intention of releasing the source code. It's Great!
Boiling a cat? Boiling?
:)"
Barbarian.
You fry a cat in peanut oil with garlic, lemon grass, chilis and a dash of soy sauce.
Bit stringy, especiallyh with a Chinese cat, but not too bad.
dave "taste like chicken
The mode of distribution hardly effects the copyright, whether it's on floppy, CD-ROM, tapes or harddisks. Or harddisks inside a customized machine.
besides that, the software isn't "really" Linux anyway...
It doesn't matter at all what the product is, if it is derived from a GPL'd program or just uses significant portions of code (more than a few lines) from a GPL'd program it must be put under GPL. With the exception of course when the copyright holders make an explicit exception through a contract or whatever.
Any lawyers out there that could clarify?
That didn't really need a lawyer, I think.
Even that the message is downmarked it's right in that most of the world (sigh - I gonna be flamed, btw: I'm from Russia ;) has no interest in those modifications.
If taiwanese/chinese people are concerned - well - it doesn't make it a topic for slashdot (where there's a LOT of fascists, alas. Results are predictable)
Regarding copyright infringement lawsuits, given all of the money behind Linux these days, one would think that we would be able to find significant financial support for enforcing our copyrights, as we did in correcting the Linux trademark issue. There is also some chance that we can bring a criminal, not civil, prosecution in some forms of copyright piracy.
But the sad fact is that it may simply not be possible to enforce the GPL in some nations, China included. You certainly can enforce it, though, if the Chinese company decides to sell its product in another nation that has conventional copyright laws.
But we still haven't seen if the company is simply confused about the GPL.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Every time Corel is mentioned we get a bunch of Canada-bashing. What's the diff?
The post above should be moderated through the roof -- it's right.
Look at all the pirating and other forms of copyright violation that occur in China. I mean, on Ebay the other day I saw a Chinese company (or individual?) selling Godfather and Star Wars (Special Edition) trilogy DVDs. No matter what the international copyright laws say, not much is being done on the enforcing end over there.
Now, in this particular case, it doesn't seem like they're actually breaking the GPL literally: the mods they've made might not be to gpl'd code, it might be their own stuff. Or, they might not be withholding the changes, just not shipping them with their distro. That's perfectly legal, folks. As long as there IS a way to get them, it's kosher with the gpl.
But again, we don't know yet if these people are just confused about the GPL as Corel was, and think they can wait for the end of their Beta tests to release source or something.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Pashol ti
blow it out yer ass
I love it when idiots post to say they don't want to discuss something...
The developers are whiners too.
no, you need to: BL0W IT OUT YER ASS
I doubt anyone would argue that (as a possibly inaccurate example) the guys at Corel are godless commies because they didn't provide the source to their distribution
Well they are Canadian.
moderation at its best.. then again, is that a good thing?
... and you should BLOW IT OUT YER ASS till it penetrates the roof.
Ahh, good comment (well, cept for 2nd to last line.. *shrug*). Here's where I differ, which of course is my opinion.
I tend to include BSD work before the free Net/1 release because institutes were freely able to obtain the code, and work on it, others easily (though illegally) obtained BSD from UGs (as BSD was *very* popular), and companies were able to get the BSD work, while paying AT&T the license fees. Thus, I see it as inclusive, not exclusive.
As the average user could not obtain the code, the average user was not going to be writing the code. The people writing the code were from universities, as RMS left the MIT AI lab just so he didn't have any legal problems. These were the the programmers, and they could see the code and contribute code. Looking at the copyright, it begins 1979 (though I thought BSD began earlier), which predates FSF's founding.
Of course, your more in the right than I am. In the 80s, it was far different than it is today, so I tend to view BSD as open from the beginning, even though it was not.
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
About BP formula and RC 1.0 from my point of view. ,not for sale , I do .
" 10. ÔõÑùñÈÔúÂë?(Chinese)The BP formula is just a technical board , I have not
seen any other place to discuss licenses problem of
their development work.
1.0 RC is for help people to test
no think there is anything with "Money"
1.0 RC is not a distribute and should be treated
as the previous beta test package , the only different
is this 1.0 RC could be used for installation test.
Some information from the FAQ of Blue Point Beta package:
FAQ.TXT section 10:
10. How To Get Source Code: (en)
ÎÒÃÇÇ£ÄÀøÍÓó¼ÒÎÓëÎÒÃÇÄ×÷£ËÌÐòüÄÔúÂëù±¾ÖÎÈýöÖ£(Chi
We are welcome people to develop with us, the source of this package include three part: (en)
1. ÄÚË(Kernel)ÄúÂëÖ(Chinese)
1. Kernel part: (en)
ÔÚæÀïÎÒÃÇÔÝʱÌá©ÈÎÎñȽ£ÎÒÃÇÐÅÔÚÕýʽÐÐæÀï½áüÀÓУøÇ
At this time in developing , we have not providing any source code,but in the future Release version , source code will be included, and could also be get by ftp/cvs
2. CXWIN ÄÔúÂëÖ(Chinese)
2. CXWIN Source Code (en)
ÔÚÔÀÀæÀï½áüÀÔÂë£ÒòÎXFree86ÄÔúÂë¼ó£ÊÇ ÉÒÔÔÚÎÒÃÇÍøÕ¾ÉÏñÃ:(Chinese)
For the preview version , there isn't source code , because XFree86 source is too big to put into it, but you can get it by: (en)
http://openunix.org/pub/studio_ program/CXwin/CXWIN/
ftp://openunix.org/pub/studio_pr ogram/CXwin/CXWIN/
3. ÖÐÎÄÐÅÏüÍÏàØ(Chinese)
3. Chinese message packages and patches (en)
ÍÑùÒòÎÕ¼äÎÊÌâ£ÔÀÀæÒáüÀÕâЩÔúÂë£ÎÒÃÇÐÅÔÚÕýʽÐÐæÀï½
Also because of space problem , the preview version won't include source part
"
---- Forgive my poor English.
Clue: I worked at a commercial software company, whose attitude towards piracy was they'd do it, but if you pirated the software *they* wrote...
But I somehow doubt Linux/BSD/etal will be extinguished...
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
China doesn't have much of a rule of law. Recent trials of Hong Kongers on the mainland have been in closed courts and almost invariably ended up in executions.
dai wai
Just to clarify a couple of misconceptions that this thread seems to be generating: First, we distribute the souce code on BRICKHouse machines only. Read the GPL, this is in full compliance. Second, I developed all the kernel changes and contrary to what anyone claims to "know," there are only five lines of assembler in it.
damn it man, your tones are all wrong, you just called me a pregnant elephant!
Oh, wait...
dai wai
Quick! Somebody build a bridge for all these trolls.
Actually, it's based on something or other that runs on Zope. Sort of a Slash Lite, if you will. Well, feature-wise anyway. In fact, the formatting engine is just about the only thing not linked to at the bottom of the TECHNOCRAT.NET page.
American people have no sense of community. You look at such a big nation of people, and all the different subcultures that bash each other. The geeks vs the jocks, the goths taking blame for stuff that happened at Columbine, etc, etc. Need I go on? Oh, and did I tell you that they eat *CORN*? That's right, the stuff that normally gets fed to animals all over Europe. Therefore, americans must be animals, ya? 8-) Stuff on TV, what about MTV and the Jerry Springer show? I once saw this girl on Springer, man, she slept with the whole hockey team... *EVERY* culture has their differences. If you can't understand that, then haul your lily ass off the internet - it doesn't belong on this global network.
And oh.. In responce.. join the KKK bitch
It's available at http://squishdot.org/
Okay I'm chinese, my chinese software can read but not write chinese. And I will try my best to help you guys communicate. I'm not going to post it top level since nobody will scoll down to read it.
:) Eng->chi->Eng :)) But we are currently unable to run the internet development organization. In china is hard to do opensource, but I think the difficulty is not only in us. I think there are 2 point, one is the envirnment, people should accept(my note: or "admit") opensource, respect opensource. two is people should have the enthusiasm and ability to contribute. Right now how many people crazy like us, working opensource as our only job?
I don't seem to find any discussion of GPL license except in the bottom, (most of them are installation related discussion) here is one post by blus in 9/30/99 2.05am entile "I'm very disappinted" (eng translation following)
--------------------------------------
â±ÕËÐÄÔÌÐò£ÒѾΥÁËGPL
½¼¼ÊõËøËÀÔÚ"bp linux"ÉÏ£Íü¼ÇÁËÓÐ
ÜàÈËÏmandrake,openlinux,slackware,turbolinux,
redhat,debian...
ü±ðÌá±õÐÅý...±ÈÎÒÖÀÐÅÃÓÐÂÉÐÓ¦£
ÔÚÖÐúãÅÔúÂëÄÈÜÄÑ£ÎÒÏàÐÅÖÓÐ×ñÊØ
ÅÔúÂëÄæÔòÅÄÜÕ£
×ö¼öÉÔÚÔ¼ÉÏÉý¼ÄrpmÕæÄÜÄÑÂð£ó¼ÒÉÒÔÈ¥
ÌÍåÄCLE¼Æ®£ËûÃÇ×öÄÒÜÍêÕû£
bpÄÈÊÇÑÛϼ¼Êõ×îÊÊÓÃÄÖÐÎĽ£ÎÒÔ½ÒʱÄÌÊÓ
ÙÁËËü£
----------------------------
translation (paraphasing)
Close the nuclear source process (my note: something like that), it's already GPL violation. Locking the chinese-lize technoligy in "bp linux", you forget a lot of people like mandrake, slackware, turbolinux, openlinux, redhat, debrian...
DOn't even mention that you promised it.. I know promise can't enforced by law. Working opensource in China is pretty hard, but I believe only following the rule of opensource can develop. working a few upgrading rpm that base on the "original release" (my note, I don't know what this refer to) is that hard? People can go see taiwan's CLE project, they are doing pretty complete!
bp is currently the most fit chinese plan (my note: plan or project) I don't want to see the temparary shortsight ruins it!
-------------------------------------
okay, now is the respond. It should be from the writer. "hahalee"
---------------------------------------
CLE 0.9É! ¼ÙÕ×ÁË. ÒödistributionÀïÃæÒÄ
ÄÎ÷ÂúàÄ. ±ÈÈçË, PineÄhz±àÂë½âÂë, ±ÈÈçkmail
Ädebug, ÓÐÏÍscriptÈÈ... ÎÒÃÇÎÒÀÀ±ðÄ
distributor½øÐÐÈí¼üÎ. anyway, ÈçûÄãüÏ
previewÄÇÑùÄÐÐ,ÒÉÒÔ¼ÌÐøÊÓÃ.
ØÓÚopensource,ÎÒÃÇÐÅýÄÊÇÔÚÕýʽÐÐÖÐÌá©source,
ÕâöÖÊÇÒöÏàÔÎÈÄdebugæ±¾. opensourceÄÀíÂÛ
ÄÈÌá½Á˼ÊÐģʽ. ÎÒÃÇÏÖÔÚÃÓÐÄÜÁ¦½øÐÐÍøÂç
Ä×éÖ.ÔÚÖÐúãopensourceÄÈÜÄÑ, ÎÒÄѦ
áÖÔÚÓÚÎÒÃÇ, ÎÒÏëÓ¦ÃÓÐÁ½ã: ÒÊǾ,ó¼ÒÒÐÈÏ
opensource,Ò×ðÖØopensource. ÊÇó¼ÒÎÓëÄÈÈÇéÍÄÜÁ¦.
ÏÖÔÚÓÐàÉÙÈËÄÜÏñÎÒÃÇÒÑùè, ×ÖöÀãopensource?
----------------------------------
Take a look at CLE0.9, already a few gig. There are a lot of thing need to be changed in a distribution. Say, Pine's hz translation (my note: something like that, it;s getting technical) Or the kmail's debug, or the system's script, etc. We can't rely on other distribution to maintain the package. Anyway, if you like the Preview way of release(my note: now this can be interpred as "distribution" I know it's critical) You can keep using it.
About opensource, we promise providing source in the offical release. This is merely a stable debug version. The opensource's theory did mention the "flee market development model" (my note: yeah that's as close as I can get
----------------------------------
translation finish.
okay. I do have some opinion. But I think my tranlation is good enough for people to draw their conclusion. Please remember, if they are not responding, the chances are they can't express themslves in eng correctly! (well why don't you speak in chinese?) Anyway, don't jump on them too quick.
Regarding the "commie" comments, heh I just come back from a.s.baseball.yankees, I think I can take those crap. I still have 4 page anthro paper to write! Got to go!
in case I miss something, my real address is name0000@yahoo.com
-Ye Chen
Okay, let's think about this one for 2 seconds. China has no human rights. They kill newborns. They sell bootleg software in stores, legally I might add. Why would the give 2 shits about the GPL. They copy programs anyhow, why would the GPL make a difference, when the EULA that Microcrap pushes doesn't mean shit either. Someone said they can redeem themselves by saying they're sorry and publishing the source. Yeah right, what reason do they have? Who's going to stop them? Bill Gates can't stop them. None of us are going to use some chickenshit distribution that has chinese characters anyway, I can't read that crap. If you can call them and bitch. Who's to say that corporations don't use GPLed software in closed source projects and lie about it. Who's to know?
Or as the version sugguested: Release candidate. They promise to release source code on official release of the distribution. They awared the complaint but they insist that they did not violate the GPL.
GPL is relatively plainly worded (for a license) and intellectual property licensing is protected by the Federal law, therefore a corporation foolish enough to challenge GPL would be an inviting target by many opportunistic (working on contingent) lawyers who see 'class action suit'.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Setting aside, for the moment, the question of whether it has merit in any other jurisdiction,
what does the GPL represent to a Chinese civil
court? Does China have civil law as we know it?
The image that has been planted in my mind of
Chinese law, involves a court system that sits
on a 3 meters high podium and makes brutal decisions. Would bringing a redress for a GPL violation subject the complainant to the risk of
being dragged off to work in a labor camp for 50 years, if it suited the judge? Or has the impression of Chinese justice that is presented to Americans been grossly distorted?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Yes, there is a long tradition of disregard for property rights in many asian countries. This should be troubling for the "banish IP" folks who lurk on Slashdot; the fact is that your precious GPL would be worthless without strong intellectual property laws.
Actually, the FSF has Eben Moglen, a professor at Columbia, as their general council. I also think that RMS is eager to get a GPL test case so that he can see if it holds up, and if it doesn't, what needs to be fixed. Hell, NeXT took one look at the GPL and decided to not even try to fight it.
It is interesting that you should bring this up. Indeed, this post is Truth, but in fact, was moderated down. Slashdot moderation doesn't work.
Why is this marked flamebait?
It is clearly true that had the organization used BSD instead of Linux this would not be an issue. It also shows that the GPL and Linux are anti-business.
The moderation here is clearly a GPL zealot pushing his own agenda despite the detriment to society and the industry. Someone should moderate this up to where it belongs.
Additionally, the first response to this comment should be moderated up as well as it is also an example of moderator abuse.
yeah, especially when both show up as anonymous cowards :) I'm sick of the gpl discussion myself also, thats twice, or maybe even 3 times its come up this week in one story or another.. oh well..
If a person (or group) decides to act in violation of the GPL, the programmers themselves should be the ones to enforce it, not the US Dept of Whatever (or any other government).
How do we enforce it? That's obvious. Groups and people that violate the GPL just plain and simply loose INCREDIBLE amounts of trust in the free source community. If they proceed to continue their violations, the community itself will just have nothing to do with them or their project. If noone in the community wants anything to do with a project, the project dies.
Don't underestimate the power we possess.
This is about as much an accomplishment as the UN "comdemning" Iraq for their latest violation-du-jour. Hussein's programs hav now been moving forward largely unhindered now while the UN condemns him regularly. Who won the Gulf war again? What was accomplished?
Without the power to back them up, rules and licenses and treaties are utterly meaningless. So GPL has been violated? Who will SUE? Who will PAY to do something? And something better be done if you don't want GPL to be declared "abandoned" for lack of enforcement. So who will act? You? Mr. Slashdot reader. Mr. AC over there? ESR? And if no one does anything, expect to see more GPL violations and more inaction. There's also the question of who can sue for a given GPL violation. Can only the original author of the relevant piece of software sue? Can others sue for him (with or without the original author's permission). GPL says NOTHING about punishment for violations and therefore, IMO is meaningless.
GPL is little more than "oh please", "It would really be nice if", "we recommend", "don't be naughty", "we'll frown at you really hard if" drivel. Rules require REAL PEOPLE AND REAL POWER to back 'em up or they're meaningless. So far, GPL violations have been corrected by the company merely trying to fend onn bad publicity and not because of real legal pressure. Eventually, there will be a GPL violator who DOESN'T CARE about bad publicity. This Chinese Linux vendor may be just such a violator. Others will be waiting to violate GPL based on what they see happening with this case.
You are right. The 'CLE' is the GPL complaint by taiwanese. If we are talking about distribution, two new chinese distribution from taiwan will be available very soon, powerlinux is of them, based on RedHat and CLE.
Actually, if they give someone _inside_ of the company a beta or alpha or random coyrighted hack, as a binary, then that is distribution, and they'd have to give the person source under the GPL, or at least make it available. ;) ) ...a clear statement of what the program wants to grow to become. Given that, there can be direction and clarity. Without it, you might have a perfectly bugless program that was just a pile of unrelated functionality.
The trick is, in this situation it's probably being given to another programmer anyway- so it's _assumed_ that they're getting the source (to work on). But the point is an important one- there's no distinction between alpha, beta and final, and no distinction between inside the company and outside it, as far as GPL applying. When you give a person a binary you let them have source, that's the bottom line. It most certainly applies within a company as well. To control this, only give binaries and source to people who need it to work on, and who agree with you not to distribute it more widely yet. That has to be voluntary because the GPL specifically authorizes anyone to redistribute further on their whim, and doing so is also in the spirit of the license.
You can explain to your programmer that you want the program to be more finished and whole before the world sees it. Suggesting that the bugs should be fixed first is not a good idea, because that brings thoughts of 'many eyes/easy bugs' and is an argument for going widely public instantly. Instead, a better argument for voluntarily keeping a distribution limited at first is that in early stages, the 'essence' of the program is very blurry and weak. You want to have the program stand on its own and seem original and worthwhile, bugs or no bugs, by the time you're really putting it out there. Otherwise people might not understand what it wants to be, and the open source interaction might pull it in many unhelpful directions.
One might even say that a GPLed program doesn't need a buglist so much as a manifesto (ducks
Looks like Caldera screwed up....again. Makes the OpenLinux trademark a little hard to enforce as well.
I think you've spent a little too much time making your mark on this discussion, Bruce.. (not that I mind seeing some actually intelligent, factual posts, but the above seems a little confusing at first glance..) Using the word "but" in and of itself would seem to indicate to me that the current sentence was an exception to the preceding one.. which would mean that you would have meant to say that "people have trouble understanding that beta-tests are [not] distribution", and I rather doubt that, given the context.. unless, of course, you also meant to say that "that [internal company employee only] beta-tests are [not] distribution", which again, given the context, seems to be the most accurate assertation.
Care to clarify, or have I pretty much nailed it on the head? I can't be entirely sure due to the confusing nature of the wording involved. Perhaps it's just because I don't take too well to subtlety. Who knows..?
P.S. The first sentence is a reference to the notion that once you take it upon yourself to reply to a large number of posts within a single discussion, being forced to repeat yourself often, you're likely to slip up somewhere, however slight. ;)
~ Kish
GPL doesn't require that every distribution includes the source. What it requires is that the source is available. The GPL can be satisfied by them posting the complete source on the Net. The may need to add and update to the distribution that includes that URL where they can find the source.
Clarification: If you get the code from them, and then you ask for the modifications, and are rejected.
I haven't looked to see if they're a "Wide open FTP server" or if they're a CD only kinda thing, but they are only required to give the mods to the people they distributed it to, upon request.
e.g., if you buy the binaries from FooBarOnlineCDSales.com, and it doesn't include the source, only FooBarOnlineCDSales.com is required to give you the mods. If they don't have them, then they damn well better get them (pronto) from whoever THEY got the code from, so as to be able to meet the GPL's requirements.
Now if its an FTP server, they have a hard time proving they DIDN'T supply you, and they need to make it available to one and all who ask.
The GPL states that the code must be freely available. So if they post it on a web/ftp server they'll be fine. Or if they include an address that someone can write for the source, then thats ok too...
:-)
Just ask Linuxcare about their boot/root credit card cd gimmick at LWE
Get a life, not a lifestyle. - Hikem Bey
I was extremely surprised to see her at a recent convention in the same booth as the brickhouse people. Not only that, she also tried to start a fight with some guy there as well (wearing a defcon t-shirt). Whoever the guy was, it was obvious he had much more respect from those around him at the convention than she did...
are somewhat of a dissapointment to me. I thought that the "great nation of USA" should be a little more cultivated than to still be afraid of the "Red Danger".
Can't you people still see it.. socialism, communism, marxism... it's all just governments... the people that populate the country in question are still humans, and diserve nothing else than to be treated as such
---
Killroy Woz Here
that, in the first place, it forbids companies to build proprietary stuff based on GPL stuff.
what is the worst that could happen?
fragmentation? yes, it's possible, but if your goal is 'world domination' would you rather have chinese people using a proprietary ver. of linux or windoze? it's easy to change linux distros coampared to learning linux after using MS...
developers have a harder time writing chinese programs? if that happens, who is ultimately hurt--seems it would be Blue Point.
choosing a good licence is a tough decision, and ultimately everyone who wrote linux must have their wishes honored. i do respect this. but, i would love to see programmers choose a licence that truly allows free redistribution (under any terms) of the code. or, here's an idea, release your code to the public domain!
"the GPL goes a step further than other FRLs by stating that the GPL automatically applies to the totality of any program that incorporates GPL'ed code."
Interested in learning Chinese or Japanese? check out Chinese/Japanese-English Dictiona
The forum adm. deleted post related to the open source status.
Reason: It is a tech forum. If you want to talk about other things, you have to email to the adm.
but wheather you have a chance to win is not for sure. Law is simple
Personally, I wouldn't use a distro that made me get the kernel source elsewhere (I buy CD's), but in regards to a violation, I think that it should be fine if it is possible to get it somewhere, even if it means giving the users of the distro a URL for some other site. I'm not sure what the GPL says though.
It is published like for a year or a year and half. How ignorant it will be? Use old information to critices others.
That's true.. remember whose moderating it. However, if I think that because the origional poster had a bad attitude, and you said it wasn't a flame (while it wasn't, but was disrespectful), it didn't mean moderaters felt to great about you. If you had maybe gone into more detail.. definately worth a 2. Alone, its not worth a hit, but it was a side effect of the first poster.. (and they say there's no censorship on /.!)
Moderations aren't always fair (you see 5s for no reason, except they posted early and moderators were really lazy, or they see some name they recognize). I wouldn't know how to fix it, and I don't think he maintainers of slashdot care enough to ponder the subject further.
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
I didn't know that Linus was such a radical.
You, my friend, are my hero.
I hate stinking chinks.
Brickhouse uses a modified 2.2.2 kernel. You can use "telnet thirdpig.com" to see this (log in as root, there's no password). They have added at least one file to the kernel source tree, /usr/src/linux/kernel/pbs.c, but trying to cat this file gives "permission denied".
Communism is an ideology, not a race.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
- Jeff
If they're not violating IP on proprietary software and music and pirating *that* they're making changes to copylefted stuff and not releasing the source.
Over at 3rd Pig they've got a RedHat kernel (from the 4.1 distro i believe) that's been hacked up to use process based security. They've been running a public test and haven't released the code even though they have been asked. I don't know if they give you the source when you purchase it, but at the price they charge (~$10k+) i don't think i'll find out.
I would think that if they modified a linux kernel, they would have to release the source. (Don't flame me as i haven't really read up on the liscences and i'm just expressing my opinion.)
My
The fact that China would attempt to obtain software in violation of a license agreement comes as no surprise to me.
They have for years denied the validity of "intellectual property" as a means to obtain that that belongs to another and do with it as they wish.
I personally witnessed them install about $60,000 USD worth of proprietary software on a system for which they did not have a license. (The site had two mainframe class machines. System A was licensed for a particular software. The Chinese government declined to purchase a license for System B. Yet they deliberately installed the software on the second machine.)
The "irony/funny thing/cute part" is that in copying the software to the second machine, they made a mistake that hung the system and asked me to help them solve the problem. After having the software removed and the system returned to production, their staff again copied the software, this time getting it right. The local government even put up a large banner praising his success their systems' analyst for saving the government the license fees.
This job is a test. It is only a test. Had it been an actual job You would have received Raises, Promotions, and ot
Under the GPL you have to either include the source, or make the source avaiable upon request.
This means if they didn't include the source, you must email/write/phone/fax/etc them and request the source code, they then must provide the source by ftp/http/email/letter/fax/etc.
Not including source is not against the GPL, not fullfilling request made for the source, is breaking the GPL.
I buy binary only Linux cds all the time. If I want/need the source, %99.9 of the time it can be obtain by (ftp||www).DISTRO_NAME.(COM||ORG||NET)
Checks this distro's ftp/web site that looks like they broke the GPL, it should be there, if not email them asking for it, if they don't fullfill your request (in one way or another), then it is time to put the smack down on the punks...
Remember if you request source by fax and they post it to there web page, that is STILL legal, just because they don't fullfill your request they way you see fit, doesn't mean they are breaking the GPL... What if Red Hat, had to mail complete source of all the GPL programs in there distro by airborn mail, printing 1 Million + lines of code shiped via next day air, it would put them out of business. Instead they include most (if not all) with the distro media, ftp server...
The flip side is that we don't have to worry about penalties for stealing THEIR software.
Not that I see why anyone'd want to - the Chinese are shitty coders...
If you take a look at my reply to another poster, you'll see I agree the licenses aren't something to go crazy about. I was also trying to show how they did nothing to horrible, except being forgetful. IMHO, Slashdot continues to jump the gun, as I still have my doubts on Corel's "violation." Thus, you can see I'd rather break the GPL than nuke the chinese.
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
There is a big differance between flame bait, and truth. Ive seen good anti kde/gnome/linux/bsd posts get moderated UP, and pro-linux/etc FLAIMBATE moderated down. The reason for moderation, many people just do not care to read rude posts. Yours is a good example. You could have expressed the same point of view without referaces like "Linux retards" and I bet your ass it would NOT have been moderated down. If you act like a child you will get treated like a child,... But if you just try to discuss something like an adult you will get treated accordingly. And for the note, a great deal of the comments Ive seen moderated down are ususally because of racism, or are just set out to hurt people. I firmly believe that is a very good reason to have a moderation system. And yes, you might argue... What about free speach. Yes, that is being addressed because even the most racist arguements are there. And people who want to see these things still can. It takes a lot for a post to be deleted all together. Because of all this you DO have a right to read comments reguardless of moderation or content, and you have a right to post likewise. There are two ways to make a point. One you end up calling the other person (group of people) a bunch of harsh names and end up making people mad. The other you just be civilized and express your point calmly. A lot more people will have no problem accepting the later as a valid opinion. just my 2 cents excuse my spelling, I do not have time right now to bring up a spell checker.
The same could work against the Company though. If each module owner sued the hypothetical corporation in question separately how much would it benefit the corporation to have x number of lawsuits against them? I see the loss vs. profit becoming very severe very quickly, not even mentioning the negative publicity for the corporation. And I think us open-sourcers are creative and persistant enough to make them feel the sting of doing something so foolish.
and I still say, nuke the commies.
You thought wrong. The simplified chinese this distribution uses is not used in Taiwan which uses traditional chinese. They have their "Chinese Linux Extension" at cle.linux.org.tw which is fully GPL compliant.
Anyone violating the GPL wont care a rats if the OSS Community dont like them. Like, why would they care?
But it is just a promise, not legally confirm that they must release the source late.
So, Unlike Corel. Blue Point don't want to make any correction up to now.
Several points from their agruments which I can't stand for:
1. They agru that the current CLE have tons of problems, they said working so hard to correct the mistakes. (CLE is majority from taiwan).
2. They said they are working so hard, so they don't want to release it now.
3. They said others don't understand their special situation
Anyway, please support debian.
It's long been a practiced for lesser developed nations to try to bootstrap themselves into the modern world by acquiring technology hook or crook from more developed nations. This can take the form of pirating, industrial and governmental espionage (anyone who thinks the Chinese haven't been spying here is badly mistaken), getting licenses to manufacture XYZ and then reneging on terms limiting the disclosure to third parties etc.
Software piracy, GPL violations etc. are only the tip of the iceberg.
Nor is China the first, nor will they be the last to do this. They may in fact be the WORST though by virtue of their size and their represive government.
The only way to deal with the issue is by hitting them where it hurts, in the pocketbook. If GPL is being violated we need to complain to the same trade organizations that put pressue on China for all their other acts of international piracy, and complain to senators/congressmen about the favorable trade agreements that are being pushed through. Make no mistake about it. The current Chinese government is not your friend.
One point: China is not the USA. The GPL is a USA based copyright. It wouldn't apply to China unless China has previously agreed to honor USA copyrights.
As always, a comment like this shouldn't get an answer, but then ...
This is not only offtopic, this is completly absurd.
First, technokrat is no copy of slashdot, it has an similar look. So what, this look is a proven way to deliver this kind of information.
Technocrat delivers A DIFFERENT KIND OF INFORMATION.
Second, why do you whine about copiing in a threat about GPL. You haven't understood anything.
Third, HAVE YOU EVER LOOKED AT THE HEADERS OF AT LEAST ONE THIRD OF THE POSTERS ON SLASHDOT? THEY ALL ADVERTISE AN URL!!!!
O.K., I can deal with the concern about a Linux distribution not including source, even if it might be a bit premature.
What's with all this China-bashing, though? Sure, China's got its problems... but it's not like this is the first time someone's done this. To say it's happened because "the Chinese make their own rules" or "the Chinese don't believe in intellectual property" is speculation at best, and bigotry at worst.
They screwed up. Westerners have done the same thing, and I doubt anyone would argue that (as a possibly inaccurate example) the guys at Corel are godless commies because they didn't provide the source to their distribution.
---
Consult, v. t. To seek another's approval of a course already decided on.
Are the Chinese even signatory to any of the treaties that govern these things? If they're not, then the license doesn't have any power in China (and may not in most of the world anyway) and they're not violating it.
Typical - on the one hand we have people saying that the GPL is communism, and on the other people blaming communism for violation of the GPL.
I've just had a look at the first half of the forum (too long, got to do some work). All of them are about installation problems and packages available in the distribution. I found 2 comments about source code availablilty. The first one is in English "Isn't it Linux? Please Open Source!" and was regarded as a flame in the one reply (also in English). The second one is in Chinese, posted by a RealLinux (0 byte(s) ReaLinux 10/8/99 2:04 pm). The title of the post says "No source code, I don't need BluePoint". There's one reply by a Simon (23 byte(s) simon 10/8/99 11:19 pm) saying "Good! Then go ahead..." (original reply in English).
It seems like it's not seen as an issue at all on the forum.
Are you really a BSD user, or just some idiot trying to make BSD look bad? When Linux zealots loved to try to degrade BSD users, this was exactly what they did. Sometimes I can't tell if its these users just reversing it (since they know everyone hates it and makes BSD, as it made Linux before, look bad).. or more likely.. just some little @$%!ing brat.
Now, the GPL has every right to exist, and users have every right to make sure other obide by it. I'm sure if you go rape some child they're parents will happily get the government to put the full force of the law down on your... But this isn't as severe, which is why no ones going to jail or such. Violations still deserve attention, to be takn with concern (while staying calm) and not to ridicule the license because some people are inept and try to ignore it.
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
That applies if you don't distribute source code with the product.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I felt that the comments needed no further explanation, everyone knows it the GPL and Linux are anti-business, the only issue is whether or not you think that is a good thing. (PS, it isn't :)
but incohesiveness such as that exhibited by you certainly fits the definition of mentally-challeged perfectly. in fact if you look up in the dictionary (which i doubt you are capable of) on the definition of moran (or mentally-challeged, the pc version), you would see your name boldly listed as synonym in there, and with your picture alongside for easy pictorial illustration of the term. or if you don't know how to look up moran in the dictionary, there is a simplier way. just look at the mirror and you would see one.
This is slightly off topic, but today I was playing with Mozilla M10's editor. I created some HTML and it stuck this at the top of what I wrote (inside an HTML comment):
,hacker Perl another Just)'
-- The contents of this file are subject to the Netscape Public
-- License Version 1.1 (the "License"); you may not use this file
-- except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of
-- the License at http://www.mozilla.org/NPL/
(and so on...)
Which I thought was a bit off considering I was the person who wrote what was in the file - not netscape or mozilla or anyone. I'm assuming this licence will be removed before release, in the meantime I guess I'll take a trip to bugzilla...
Matt.
perl -e 'print scalar reverse q(\)-:
Matt. Want XML + Apache + Stylesheets? Get AxKit.
I'm ashamed to be chinse and living in america.
Nobody is making you stay. If you don't like it you are free to leave. In fact, I would encourage you to do so. In fact, I think I could arrange for some people to buy you a one way plane ticket to Peking with the provision that you turn in your visa/green card/citizenship before you leave.
I'm sure that after Tienamann the secret police would welcome you back with great fanfare. You might have to spend the rest of your life in a forced labor camp, breaking rocks at Two Gorges or picking rice but hey - you wouldn't be ashamed to be chinese and living in America.
I can see that we need to increase opium shipments to china again. The natives are getting uppity.
True.. and of course that's why whatever I write, software or written word, goes under a BSD style license (I don't like OCL). Actually.. I'll be writing a lot about differences in license if I ever get my project organized enough...
Everyone knows it, but telling supporters in their face wont always make you friends. The GPL serves as a lobbying tool for FSF, BSD serves as a license to improve the community (in my opinion). I see the BSDL and the GPL in a similar fashion as what happened with the hippies/yippies. The hippies started the trend, they reacted, they caused their revolution to begin. However, they weren't politicial, just doing what they wanted and thought was best. The yippies, the generation after, liked the hippy ideas but wanted to add heir political force to it... add their twist. Yippies marched, yippies screamed against vietnam. Yippies got the attention of the press as revolutionary, while the hippies were just ignored.
Sound familar? BSD has done revolutionary things technologicly, GPL done the political work. Why is it that Linux users are generally so bent on getting media in any possible fashion, yet BSD users aren't so interested in the ego of the printed page? Linux is evolutionary, BSD was revolutionary.
If you go BSD, you allow the open source world to evolve from your code, and the closed source to use that code as a starting point, and then improve (and they always do. The bugs they find, and other code as submitted as gratitude back to the origionators). Sometimes, you just have to have lots of respect for them.
The GPL takes the open code, forces businesses to see it but not have it (taunt them), and then makes a big media blitz where companies are lead to believe GPL'ing means instant free developers, customers.. capital. Its not true.. but they have one heck of a story to tell.
That's my opinion of it. FSF is a lobbying group, but I doubt they would deny that. However, I still respect and in general uphold the views of the GPL community, and I understand decency. Yours was at the edge.. and I probably would have given it 1 off (because it sounded like a cheer for the insultish attitude of the origional poster), or more likely.. just ignored it.
"Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
Well, then, I must complain about your complaining. True Technocrat.Net looks a lot like /. It may even be based on the slash code (I'm not absolutely positive on this thought). But guess what, there are a a number of sites based on Slash and I expect that number to grow. Heck I'd make one of my own if I had the time and I was better at perl.
Personally, I find that Technocrat, while more limited in scope than slashdot, to be alot like slashdot was in the old days. //end old man mode
Finally, let me say that what you put in your .sig is your own business. If you don't like seeing sigs, disable them. It's not all that hard.
2^5
http://ftp.openunix.org:81/pub/bluepoint/starprevi ew/FAQ.TXT section 3.10.3: (translated) chinese package and patch: "due to space limitation, no source code is included in this beta version, but we promise to include source code in the formal release, and you can find the source code on our homepage." Please don't be so critical of everything related to china before you get the facts.
china will becoming king of the world again
Again?
However, here's an interesting thought:
What if they don't? Will anyone be able to "enforce" the GPL (or stop the distro)? Won't this distro become hugely popular in all countries that use the Chinese characters, GPL-violation or no GPL-violation?
Just a thought.
-- Gunnar
And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
IANAL, but... Let's just hope that no major corporations discover how flimsy a protection the GPL really is.
Legal and accurate though it might be, the GPL has a fatal shortcoming as a protectant of open source rights, namely that it costs money to enforce.
I'm sure many of you are familiar with the practice among American convicts of filing spurious lawsuits against the prison system in an attempt to wear it down. Inmates have filed civil rights claims against everything from the temperature of the bathwater to the flavor of peanut butter served in the cafeteria. These lawsuits are not serious, but they cannot be prevented because the right to sue has been tied by the courts to the rights of free speech. The upshot is that DA's offices are exhausted in some counties with the sheer expense of filing counterclaims and motions to dismiss.
If someone really wanted to demolish the open source protections on a product, all they would have to do is reverse this tactic. A lot of open source programmers and "foundations" just don't have the money to fight more than a handful of costly legal battles. All a company would have to do would be to publish and illegally patent hundreds of modules that broke the GPL on an open source product. Then build the product out of the patented "proprietary" modules. Challengers to the legality of this maneuver would have to prove one by one that the modules were not legal, costing them thousands of dollars. And if they suceed for some module, well, it's simple enough to produce a legitimately proprietary version for one small part. Pretty soon you exhaust the original open source devs and they give up. Viola!
What we need, as other have said, is some sort of fund to hire crack lawyers. Like the ACLU, except for open source.
-konstant
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!