I've been on the sidelines for quite a while (and I'm only putting my opinion out there because I feel like I have to, not that it'll further discussion in one direction or another...) and have changed my mind several times about this issue. At first, when I had no idea what all the fuss was about, I thought that any action against GPH would've been the pits. Because of a misunderstanding of the lisence with which they have to comply with, I thought that any sort of forceful action would've been devatstating, both to the community, and to GPH themselves.
But of course, as time wore on, and nothing happened but the release of a partial, outdated code, I began to wonder exactly what was going through their heads. Now, I understand that it may not be GPH's fault, but the release of the source about a month ago was due, probably to their somewhat of an understanding of the lisence.
I'm learning about how to run Linux, as I'm getting tired with Windows all of a sudden. Last night, I sat down and started to read the Linux Bible by Christopher Negus. Part of the introduction is dedicated to the GPL and other lisences. After reading that small bit, I understand WHY it is that people are getting miffed.
Linux itself depends on the community. The very thing that makes an open source project better than a proprietary project is that whoever modifies any code to work under a new sircumstance, others can build off of it, improve it, do whatever. But the brilliance of this is that hundreds of minds with different points of view can contribute to the project, and help it grow and become something better than ever conceived. To me, the work of hundreds of minds, fueled by a passion for their project is much better than a few, fueled only by money. That is what makes Linux and the Open Source community tenfold times better for everyone.
I just didn't fully grasp that concept. And, I'm sure many of the people here arguing needlesly about protecting GPH really don't. They may understand it, but they certainly haven't adopted it.
My worry about GPH going to the dumps due to legal action completely flew out the window when I read this:
Christopher Negus said:
The EuroLinux Alliance is a group dedicating to "protecting software freedom based on copyright, open standards, open competition, and open source software, such as Linux." EuroLinux is filing a petition in the European Parliament and European Council to warn about the dangers of Software Patents. To find out more, go to
http://eurolinux.org
+AND+
OSDL.org has prepared a legal defense fund to protect Linux end users and other Linux litigants (including Linus and OSDL itself).
Upon reading this, and doing more research into how "they" (The numerous GPL enforcement groups) go about getting compliance, they are not at all dirty. They're not looking for compensation, just compliance. Listen to this; Something amazing caught my eye while visiting the FSF site,
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html:
An entire industry grew up around free software, all of whose participants understood the overwhelming importance of the GPL--no one wanted to be seen as the villain who stole free software, and no one wanted to be the customer, business partner, or even employee of such a bad actor. Faced with a choice between compliance without publicity or a campaign of bad publicity and a litigation battle they could not win, violators chose not to play it the hard way.
I think the reason that I and many others here wanted to see some of this stop is because one of the first threads about this was very militant in it's approach to the situation. We need to understand that doing this will benefit us in the long run. Faced with the decision to go to court or comply, Dignsys will most definitely comply. They cannot win. It's up to someone to tell them to start making things happen, and that's why we're here, as a community. To make things work for us, and in turn, everyone who uses this wonder of a GP2X.
