Apple is
suing Psystar the maker of the open computer. This just shows, you cant trust a proprietary software company. Psystar should have bundled gNewSense or even Ubuntu.
The second event strikes close to home. A niner is featured in Linux Journal. rj's illegal distro was in
Linux Journal. I cant believe they wasted their time and my bandwidth. My question is how much did Microsoft pay rj to infect the GNU/Linux world.
I wrote to Psystar and offered to help them certify gNewSense on their hardware. As for rj, I urge everyone not to consider his M$ sponsored distro and I have written the FSF and OSI on the legality of his "product"
-
corona_coder
Only Proprietary software vendors deal in absolutes.
-
littleguru
<3 Seattle
How can a distro be illegal? Doesn't the GPL explicitely allow to change and alter, as long as it stays open?
-
Harlequin
http://twitter.com/TrueHarlequin
Can you link us to something you've done? So far we've seen codiplex.com, a bust project. You trying to import BMWs into Canada, probably another bust project.
Anything? Post us some links. -
corona_coder
Only Proprietary software vendors deal in absolutes.
A distro is illegal when the developer includes proprietary drivers and software. Realbasic is not open source, Nvidia and ATI drivers are proprietary hence they are illegal. Ignore him and he goes away. It was a neat trick by Microsoft to try and come in the back door, but you have pitt bulls like me and Eben Moglen keeping an eye out.littleguru said:How can a distro be illegal? Doesn't the GPL explicitely allow to change and alter, as long as it stays open?
Psystar hasnt written me back yet
but no matter, the courts will deem Apples EULA illegal. I do hope they see that gNewSense is the only way to go.
-
littleguru
<3 Seattle
I kind of find the GPL a little bit to strick in that matter. I find it hard to understand that you can only extend a piece of software that is licensed under the GPL by applying the GPL again. I completely and fully understand that that piece of code that was released under GPL should always stay under GPL but why does everything else need to be "GPLed"?corona_coder said:
A distro is illegal when the developer includes proprietary drivers and software. Realbasic is not open source, Nvidia and ATI drivers are proprietary hence they are illegal. Ignore him and he goes away. It was a neat trick by Microsoft to try and come in the back door, but you have pitt bulls like me and Eben Moglen keeping an eye out.littleguru said:*snip*
Psystar hasnt written me back yet but no matter, the courts will deem Apples EULA illegal. I do hope they see that gNewSense is the only way to go.
Why not mix the best of the two worlds: "GPLed" software and proprietary software... -
Harlequin
http://twitter.com/TrueHarlequin
Repost:corona_coder said:
A distro is illegal when the developer includes proprietary drivers and software. Realbasic is not open source, Nvidia and ATI drivers are proprietary hence they are illegal. Ignore him and he goes away. It was a neat trick by Microsoft to try and come in the back door, but you have pitt bulls like me and Eben Moglen keeping an eye out.littleguru said:*snip*
Psystar hasnt written me back yet but no matter, the courts will deem Apples EULA illegal. I do hope they see that gNewSense is the only way to go.
Can you link us to something you've done? So far we've seen codiplex.com, a bust project. You trying to import BMWs into Canada, probably another bust project.
Anything? Post us some links. -
RoyalSchrubber
One. How many time travellers does it take to change a lightbulb?
Human body needs some kind of kill switch that would activate when brains don't work anymore..
-
blowdart
Peek-a-boo
Oh don't encourage the silly buggerlittleguru said:How can a distro be illegal? Doesn't the GPL explicitely allow to change and alter, as long as it stays open?
-
blowdart
Peek-a-boo
It's not actually true; there's no restriction in distributing binaries in a distro; as long as you don't claim that bit is open source; otherwise a bunch of network cards, printer drivers, etc. simply wouldn't be there under Linux.littleguru said:
I kind of find the GPL a little bit to strick in that matter. I find it hard to understand that you can only extend a piece of software that is licensed under the GPL by applying the GPL again. I completely and fully understand that that piece of code that was released under GPL should always stay under GPL but why does everything else need to be "GPLed"?corona_coder said:*snip*
Why not mix the best of the two worlds: "GPLed" software and proprietary software...
-
littleguru
<3 Seattle
So back to the topic: it isn't illegal then, is it?blowdart said:
It's not actually true; there's no restriction in distributing binaries in a distro; as long as you don't claim that bit is open source; otherwise a bunch of network cards, printer drivers, etc. simply wouldn't be there under Linux.littleguru said:*snip*
-
blowdart
Peek-a-boo
Nope. And anyway the GPL is a contract, not a law, so you'd be in breach of contract even if it were true.littleguru said:
So back to the topic: it isn't illegal then, is it?blowdart said:*snip*
A couple of years ago Linus weighed in on it. Then of course there's Intel's wireless drivers which, whilst open source, also need microcode to be loaded to the card on boot. The microcode is not open source, it's a binary blob and licensed under a specific license.
You most certainly can redistribute non-GPL code in a linux distro; as long as it's not a derivative work of the kernel or other GPL licensed code. Again Linus clarified this.
-
TommyCarlier
Widen your gaze
I don't think it violates GPL. And even if it did, I don't think the GPL is enforceable in court. Has there ever been a legal dispute where the GPL was successfully used to settle a case?littleguru said:
So back to the topic: it isn't illegal then, is it?blowdart said:*snip* -
Minh
WOOH! WOOH!
Leonard Nimoy could've used that switchRoyalSchrubber said:Human body needs some kind of kill switch that would activate when brains don't work anymore..
-
I'm not sure you know what the word "surreal" means. Apple suing is certainly not surreal. EVERYONE not only expected, but KNEW, this would be the outcome from the very instant this clone was released. The outcome of the lawsuit is maybe in doubt, though I suspect Apple will prevail.
As for PC-OS, how in the heck do you tie that to Microsoft? And what's surreal about LinuxJournal having an article about it? It *IS* a linux distribution. -
DCMonkey
What?!?
-
blowdart
Peek-a-boo
Yes there has. In Germany mind you; I think all the US cases were settled before trail.TommyCarlier said:
I don't think it violates GPL. And even if it did, I don't think the GPL is enforceable in court. Has there ever been a legal dispute where the GPL was successfully used to settle a case?littleguru said:*snip*
-
Corona Coder said:
I wrote to Psystar and offered to help them certify gNewSense on their hardware.
Sigh.
No, you didn't.
-
turrican
Nothing is forever. - Art Bell
Thread Closed
This thread is kinda stale and has been closed but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums,
or Contact Us and let us know.