So, why is it okay to build Apache httpd linked to Linux system libraries and release it under the Apache license, but not okay to build a DVD app linked to GPL'd utility code and release it under the app's license?
Because the "Linux system libraries", glibc, is licensed under the LGPL. ----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
The following language from paragraph 2 of the GPL explicitly concludes that it is possible for a program to in some way interact with GPL code and yet the proprietary independent and separate work not have to be licensed under the GPL:
"If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works... Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works based on the Program."
Vidomi's software MIGHT be considered seperate, depending on how closely you consider dynamic linking to be an interface. But it is most definately NOT independent... by Vidomi's own admittance, it's core functionality is dependent on the GPL'd code!
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
What if you change the code by just a variable name? If you have to get a new copyright on every cvsupdate you make...
You are correct, to the extent that new major versions require a separate copyright filing. See "Copyright Registration for Computer Programs" at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ61.pdf:
To obtain the full benefits of registration, each separately published version of a given computer program must be separately registered, provided each contains a sufficient amount of new or revised authorship to sustain a claim to copyright.
So syntactical changes and bugfixes wouldn't apply. And updating a CVS tree may not exactly be "publication", which the actual copyright form defines as "if copies have been distributed to the public", as long as the tree is intended for private purposes -- which can include developers and maybe even beta testers (aka the freshmeat community). But you should definately do your own research, since the issue of what constitutes public distribution is not as clearly cut...
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
It hardly looks like the Debian Release Manager "has absolutely, positively staked his life on releasing Woody no later than July 8, 2001" after viewing the following statements in the message (too lazy to read it?):
"So, a theoretical (and overly optimistic) timeline: [timeline follows]"
"Now, those dates are obviously not realistic: it's questionable whether there'll even be alpha-quality i386 boot-floppies by the end of this month;..."
"Let me note that again for anyone from the press that might be reading:
THOSE DATES ARE NOT REALISTIC!
[0]"
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
I'm running a 24/7 online radio station that's live for around 8-9 hours a day, using a single linux box. It's a PII 400, 64MB ram, 1.5GB, running apache (php, mod_perl), MySQL, icecast (serving 4 streams), and liveice (during our live broadcast hours).
I originally tried using the 25-user free version of the RealAudio server, but it had too many technical limitations, crashed frequently, limited our listenership, and stopped me from adding/changing features in the program, since it's binary only. Since then, I've been using icecast, which has 4 identical streams of differing quality (one for the intranet, 3 for modems). I'm using LAME to encode the MP3s, and liveice is setup to save the live broadcasts to an MP3 on the hard disk for archiving purposes. Afterhours, we rebroadcast the previous day's archive.mp3 using icecast's shout program. The transition from broadcasting the archives w/ shout to broadcasting live with liveice is handled by a couple cron scripts.
There's no keyboard on the server, but it has a perl script continuously running on tty10, displaying the current number of listeners, total listeners per day, average listening time, etc (all this is obtained from the icecast logfile).
We also keep about a week's worth of archives available for listeners to download on demand, and they are accessible through a little perl program I wrote called MP3 Report Generator.
When we started out, we thought bandwidth would be a problem if we had too many simultaneous listeners, so we signed up for a free account at live365.com, which relays our broadcast to up to 365 users. This worked out well, since we could redirect all our listeners to the live365 server and reduce the load on ours. I just found a funky little tool here that monitors your live365 stats (i haven't tried this yet, but i probably will).
If you're curious about more of the server stats, go to www.bwscampus.com/KBWS and click "about" on the lower left corner.
- the mad diPPer!
---- I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
I don't understand that. Why would you want to bypass their signup, when that information is probably a big influence on whether or not Borland (er, Inprise) will continue to support the open-source community? It's a huge step for them to even make BCPPB freely downloadable, and trying to beat their system surely won't gain their support. ---- I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
A while ago, (before I had heard of litestep) I also wanted virtual desktops in win95 so that it would be more like X. Everyone's favorite publisher, Ziff Davis, had published the source code to something that did this in one of their issues of PC magazine. Get ZD Desk and C++ source code here:
Slashdot Mirror
So, why is it okay to build Apache httpd linked to Linux system libraries and release it under the Apache license, but not okay to build a DVD app linked to GPL'd utility code and release it under the app's license?
Because the "Linux system libraries", glibc, is licensed under the LGPL.
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
The following language from paragraph 2 of the GPL explicitly concludes that it is possible for a program to in some way interact with GPL code and yet the proprietary independent and separate work not have to be licensed under the GPL:
"If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works... Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works based on the Program."
Vidomi's software MIGHT be considered seperate, depending on how closely you consider dynamic linking to be an interface. But it is most definately NOT independent... by Vidomi's own admittance, it's core functionality is dependent on the GPL'd code!
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
What if you change the code by just a variable name? If you have to get a new copyright on every cvsupdate you make...
You are correct, to the extent that new major versions require a separate copyright filing. See "Copyright Registration for Computer Programs" at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ61.pdf:
To obtain the full benefits of registration, each separately published version of a given computer program must be separately registered, provided each contains a sufficient amount of new or revised authorship to sustain a claim to copyright.
So syntactical changes and bugfixes wouldn't apply. And updating a CVS tree may not exactly be "publication", which the actual copyright form defines as "if copies have been distributed to the public", as long as the tree is intended for private purposes -- which can include developers and maybe even beta testers (aka the freshmeat community). But you should definately do your own research, since the issue of what constitutes public distribution is not as clearly cut...
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
It hardly looks like the Debian Release Manager "has absolutely, positively staked his life on releasing Woody no later than July 8, 2001" after viewing the following statements in the message (too lazy to read it?):
..."
"So, a theoretical (and overly optimistic) timeline: [timeline follows]"
"Now, those dates are obviously not realistic: it's questionable whether there'll even be alpha-quality i386 boot-floppies by the end of this month;
"Let me note that again for anyone from the press that might be reading:
THOSE DATES ARE NOT REALISTIC!
[0]"
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
I originally tried using the 25-user free version of the RealAudio server, but it had too many technical limitations, crashed frequently, limited our listenership, and stopped me from adding/changing features in the program, since it's binary only. Since then, I've been using icecast, which has 4 identical streams of differing quality (one for the intranet, 3 for modems). I'm using LAME to encode the MP3s, and liveice is setup to save the live broadcasts to an MP3 on the hard disk for archiving purposes. Afterhours, we rebroadcast the previous day's archive.mp3 using icecast's shout program. The transition from broadcasting the archives w/ shout to broadcasting live with liveice is handled by a couple cron scripts.
There's no keyboard on the server, but it has a perl script continuously running on tty10, displaying the current number of listeners, total listeners per day, average listening time, etc (all this is obtained from the icecast logfile).
We also keep about a week's worth of archives available for listeners to download on demand, and they are accessible through a little perl program I wrote called MP3 Report Generator.
When we started out, we thought bandwidth would be a problem if we had too many simultaneous listeners, so we signed up for a free account at live365.com, which relays our broadcast to up to 365 users. This worked out well, since we could redirect all our listeners to the live365 server and reduce the load on ours. I just found a funky little tool here that monitors your live365 stats (i haven't tried this yet, but i probably will).
If you're curious about more of the server stats, go to www.bwscampus.com/KBWS and click "about" on the lower left corner.
- the mad diPPer!
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
I don't understand that. Why would you want to bypass their signup, when that information is probably a big influence on whether or not Borland (er, Inprise) will continue to support the open-source community? It's a huge step for them to even make BCPPB freely downloadable, and trying to beat their system surely won't gain their support.
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
A while ago, (before I had heard of litestep) I also wanted virtual desktops in win95 so that it would be more like X. Everyone's favorite publisher, Ziff Davis, had published the source code to something that did this in one of their issues of PC magazine. Get ZD Desk and C++ source code here:
http://www.zdnet.co m/pcmag/pctech/content/16/14/ut1614.001.html
If that doesn't work, I think Mijenix PowerDesk or something like that had virtual desktop support.
----
I'm not stoned, I just chugged a pack of fUN dIP!
for anyone who hasn't seen it yet, it's at
http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/~adam/fm/fm.htm
its not my site, i just found it on irc.
eet sum dIP!