Gpl & Source Code - Constructive Suggestions

[sWoifal]

[...] Discussion on this matter has been taken off the forum and I can assure people that substantial combined energies are being put into resolving this as quickly and reasonably as possible. [...]

​

Thank you.

Wolfgang

 

[abigsmurf]

That stuff about protecting is only true for trademarks. Copyright violation is always copyright violation. And I'm pretty sure Korean law honors international copyrights. You obviously don't get how the GPL works.

You can honour international copyrights but you still are required to have a presence in the country to sue them.

Example : When Monty Python was shown on American TV (cbs I believe) with the rights being sold by BBC America, even though they didn't own the rights, they infact belonged to the creators. However it looked like the cast were unable to sue due to being british until one of them revealed they had a relative who was an american citizen. They then proceeded to sue BBC America.

I'm not wrong about the GPL not being the most sound licence . Just google "GPL tested" and you'll come across a number of articles talking about just how unsure most people in the legal profession are about it's validity.

 

[codesmith]

@DJWillis:

I believe you're handing things in the best way possible. You have my (and I believe a lot of other people's) support in this.

 

[barak_pearlmutter]

Example : When Monty Python was shown on American TV (cbs I believe) with the rights being sold by BBC America, even though they didn't own the rights, they infact belonged to the creators. However it looked like the cast were unable to sue due to being british until one of them revealed they had a relative who was an american citizen. They then proceeded to sue BBC America.

That particular barrier to enforcement was erased by the "Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works".
The Monty Python materials date from before that.

In other words, this wouldn't be an issue with material created within the last two decades.

 

[don]

Would you people please STOP acting like morons?
Barak is the author of the code - he is in the position to do whatever he wants to do - that's not subject for any discussions. He contributed to an open source project (which is MORE than most of you will EVER do in your lives) and now, as he's seeing someone is making profit off of his work (well, indirectly, but you may get the point), he's pissed. That's his RIGHT, people.
You're all acting up on this... unbelievable. It only shows that you people aren't ready for Open Source yet. Who cares how big Gamepark is? Who cares how many units have been sold? They DID sell units containing Open Source software, so they have the release the source upon request. "Gamepark is so close to releasing the code" just doesn't cut it. It's either having the source ready for the release of the product or buying/developing it yourself (which is mostly very expensive - so if you're going to save all that money, the least you can do is to stick to the license).
So PLEASE stop harassing Barak for enforcing what's only right. Surely, DJWillis' attempt would be the more diplomatic one, but you can't blame someone whose work has been "stolen" dozens of time to be diplomatic each time.
To bring it to a point, Gamepark is making money with their units, and they aren't obeying the GPL, which is a very bad thing. You can't just say "GPL YAY! It gets me so much stuff for free", and when your favourite video game company is in trouble because they don't seem to give a fuck about other people's copyrights, you're like "OMG, DO YOUR FUKIN COMPUTER POLICE THING! GPL SUX!".
I've seen similar situations when Franxis had trouble with MAME and rlyeh with fZX32 - I respect both authors, and those were bad situations for the users - But that's how it is, and we all survived it.

 

[mr.mirko]

Would you people please STOP acting like morons?
Barak is the author of the code - he is in the position to do whatever he wants to do - that's not subject for any discussions. He contributed to an open source project (which is MORE than most of you will EVER do in your lives) and now, as he's seeing someone is making profit off of his work (well, indirectly, but you may get the point), he's pissed. That's his RIGHT, people.
You're all acting up on this... unbelievable. It only shows that you people aren't ready for Open Source yet. Who cares how big Gamepark is? Who cares how many units have been sold? They DID sell units containing Open Source software, so they have the release the source upon request. "Gamepark is so close to releasing the code" just doesn't cut it. It's either having the source ready for the release of the product or buying/developing it yourself (which is mostly very expensive - so if you're going to save all that money, the least you can do is to stick to the license).
So PLEASE stop harassing Barak for enforcing what's only right. Surely, DJWillis' attempt would be the more diplomatic one, but you can't blame someone whose work has been "stolen" dozens of time to be diplomatic each time.
To bring it to a point, Gamepark is making money with their units, and they aren't obeying the GPL, which is a very bad thing. You can't just say "GPL YAY! It gets me so much stuff for free", and when your favourite video game company is in trouble because they don't seem to give a fuck about other people's copyrights, you're like "OMG, DO YOUR FUKIN COMPUTER POLICE THING! GPL SUX!".
I've seen similar situations when Franxis had trouble with MAME and rlyeh with fZX32 - I respect both authors, and those were bad situations for the users - But that's how it is, and we all survived it.

​

Yeah, did i miss this cool thread ?

Okay, my statement to this.

GPH is using GPL´d Software. They must release the Sourcecode, on demand. Or free on their web site.
They are not contributing/respecting/supporting the mplayer team.
They make money with their (50% mplayer / 50% linux based) hardware. And are not given ANYTHING back.
Have a lock to other companys using mplayer ( some divx players from KISS do ) They PAY for the right to use it. ( At first not, but after some time )
kiss vx mplayer
So, GPH want to earn money, with others free work, THEY must give something back.

Linux/GPL is not : "Take all, give nothing"

But Generation p2p does not care about copyrights.
Only a few (i count 3) here really understand the GPL system.

 

[FluffyPanda]

Firstly, I'd like to say a quick hello to barak_pearlmutter. Glad to have you aboard sir.

Secondly, I agree completely with your position. GPH certainly HAS infringed on your copyright, and you are well within your right to bring legal action against them.

However... I would ask you to please hold back for a while and try not to get too heavy handed. The /threat/ of legal action is certainly acceptable at this stage of play, but I'd like to limit the actual damage to GPH.

I'm looking forward to a good stay in this community and I'd like to see it swell as much as possible. More devs = more fun . GPH absolutely MUST distribute their GPL infringing source soon, but lets not let our legal rights spoil our fun in the process. No need to cut off our noses to spite our faces now.

Good day to you all, see you around


p.s. I'm delurking for this thread. My unit should be arriving shortly and the excitement is killing me, but it's a shame that my first contribution to the community is in a thread about GPL violations

 

[abigsmurf]

is everyone forgetting that GPH have stated that this console is still PRE RELEASE.

They're still organising a website for god sake, give them a chance. Also : you stand very little chance of successfull litigation without showing that GPH were willing to co-operate.

That particular barrier to enforcement was erased by the "Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works".
The Monty Python materials date from before that.

The berne convention was created 1886 and the must up to date edition was created 1971. Monty Python first aired in the US in 1973 so was covered by the current form of the berne convention. Materials created before the convention are still protected (afterall it's still illegal to copy early mickey mouse episodes)

 

[don]

is everyone forgetting that GPH have stated that this console is still PRE RELEASE.

They're still organising a website for god sake, give them a chance. Also : you stand very little chance of successfull litigation without showing that GPH were willing to co-operate.

​

Even if Gamepark would state that this console is just a hole in the matrix and non existant: They SOLD at least a few thousand units until now. Other people would call that "banana product", because it's riping at the customer. And, as Barak stated, if they'd put Win CE on the GP2x without paying the license fee to microsoft, "It's only a PRE RELEASE!" wouldn't be a sufficient explanation either.

 

[abigsmurf]

GPH is using GPL´d Software. They must release the Sourcecode, on demand. Or free on their web site.
They are not contributing/respecting/supporting the mplayer team.
They make money with their (50% mplayer / 50% linux based) hardware. And are not given ANYTHING back.
Have a lock to other companys using mplayer ( some divx players from KISS do ) They PAY for the right to use it. ( At first not, but after some time )
kiss vx mplayer
So, GPH want to earn money, with others free work, THEY must give something back.

Linux/GPL is not : "Take all, give nothing"

But Generation p2p does not care about copyrights.
Only a few (i count 3) here really understand the GPL system.

​

You don't have to pay a penny to use a GPL'ed product, otherwise it's not GPL. Also the GPL allows for source code to be provided on request (at cost), but has anyone moaning about the lack of source code emailed GPH? In Korean?

As far as I know GPH have said they'll be releasing the code, give them a chance to organise it and/or to provide a method of distribution, heck give them a chance to remove bugs so they can present decent code.

 

[abigsmurf]

Even if Gamepark would state that this console is just a hole in the matrix and non existant: They SOLD at least a few thousand units until now. Other people would call that "banana product", because it's riping at the customer. And, as Barak stated, if they'd put Win CE on the GP2x without paying the license fee to microsoft, "It's only a PRE RELEASE!" wouldn't be a sufficient explanation either.

​

I'd imagine MS would give their valuable customers a chance to pay before mounting an expensive lawsuit and losing a potentially lucrative customer...

Countless products and software get released on limited Betas quite a long time before the source is made available. There have been countless emulator ports where this has been the case.

Oh and by the way, great way to support the device by screaming bloody murder just because GPH are acting sluggish. We will no doubt get a nice big fat anti-GP2X news item on slashdot and thousands of other linux sites thanks to this thread.

 

[oneandoneis2]

Technically, it's not enough to make the source code available: They are also obliged to declare that the software is GPL'd when they supply it. I haven't looked in any depth, but I certainly haven't seen anything in the GP2X or its manual that says anything other than that it's copyright by GPH.

I think that the "Going in all legal guns blazing" approach that some seem to be advocating is a very bad way to start off a dialogue, but the simple fact is that GPH aren't upholding the terms of the GPL, and won't be even if they make all the source code available tomorrow.

Based on the company's open-source history, I find it very hard to believe that this is intentional, but whether through ignorance or malice, they are in the wrong with regards to the GPL.

 

[don]

I'd imagine MS would give their valuable customers a chance to pay before mounting an expensive lawsuit and losing a potentially lucrative customer...

Countless products and software get released on limited Betas quite a long time before the source is made available. There have been countless emulator ports where this has been the case.

Oh and by the way, great way to support the device by screaming bloody murder just because GPH are acting sluggish. We will no doubt get a nice big fat anti-GP2X news item on slashdot and thousands of other linux sites thanks to this thread.

​

Yeah, I guess you're right about microsoft. NOT.
Deserves GPH right then... And obviously, the so called user scene isn't any better, if I look at some of the posts here.

 

[Flexinoodle]

I'd imagine MS would give their valuable customers a chance to pay before mounting an expensive lawsuit and losing a potentially lucrative customer...

​

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Cheeers
Thats the funniest thing i have readin weeks

 

[abigsmurf]

*sigh*

Do you really think Microsoft would have sued Sega because they released some units early, causing them to decide Windows CE wasn't the OS of choice for the Dreamcast losing them millions?

They may not give a shit about individuals but when they've huge numbers of licences on the line, they suddenly become much more friendly.

 

[FluffyPanda]

I'd imagine MS would give their valuable customers a chance to pay before mounting an expensive lawsuit and losing a potentially lucrative customer...

Actually, a letter from the legal department would be the first thing that microsoft would do. It puts the fear of god in the enemy and gives you a better bargaining position.

We, on the other hand, should not be thinking of GPH as the enemy and are not a multinational behemoth, so MS tactics aren't really significant here.

I still think a polite letter explaining that legal action might be somewhere in the near future wouldn't hurt, but hiring a legal team or passing it over to the FSF would be a bit premature to say the least.

I don't suggest we ignore the infringement, but we can be patient and give them time to make amends. I think DJWillis probably has this in hand, but letters from the linux devs on these boards explaining that they are worried about the abuse of their copyright might just speed the process up without doing any harm to GPH or the community.

 

[abigsmurf]

I'd imagine MS would give their valuable customers a chance to pay before mounting an expensive lawsuit and losing a potentially lucrative customer...

Actually, a letter from the legal department would be the first thing that microsoft would do. It puts the fear of god in the enemy and gives you a better bargaining position.

We, on the other hand, should not be thinking of GPH as the enemy and are not a multinational behemoth, so MS tactics aren't really significant here.

I still think a polite letter explaining that legal action might be somewhere in the near future wouldn't hurt, but hiring a legal team or passing it over to the FSF would be a bit premature to say the least.

I don't suggest we ignore the infringement, but we can be patient and give them time to make amends. I think DJWillis probably has this in hand, but letters from the linux devs on these boards explaining that they are worried about the abuse of their copyright might just speed the process up without doing any harm to GPH or the community.

​

Knowing the way choatic way MS are structured now you'd get a message from their finance office, legal dept. , technical support and a memo from the Microsoft Daycare centre asking if "your son john" is sick today...

Personally I'd think just asking them in Korean would suffice rather than getting the lawyers prepped...

 

[DijiTao]

The pre-release point is bullshit.

The analogy with WinCE is a very valid one. I really don’t understand how people don’t get the whole copyright violation issue here. It’s very simple, GPL licensed software is copyrighted, in order to be granted a licensed to copy it you have to do certain things, and GPH has not done these things so they are therefore they are illegally copying a copyrighted work.

Now as far as the GPL being untested and unenforceable, I kindly direct you at all the success had by http://gpl-violations.org and I would like to direct GPH to http://gpl-violations.org/faq/vendor-faq.html in particular.

I am personally content to give GPH a little time to come into compliance, only because I have *hope* that they can become a productive contributing member of the Linux community (o how naive a thought that is) and burning them over this right now (however far in the wrong they are) doesn’t really help in the long run. A deadline needs to be given for all GPL tainted code to be released and if GPH fails to do so then whipping the entire community into a zealous GPL frenzy is quite called for. I for one will return my GP2X and expect a refund if GPH doesn’t release the source, as it being a Linux device was one of the primary reasons I bought it. I think it’s fine that some people who are bent out of shape over this to express their feelings, I just don’t think it’s quite time yet for a united front of every user telling GPH to where they can shove their GPL violating device.

 

[FluffyPanda]

Do you really think Microsoft would have sued Sega because they released some units early, causing them to decide Windows CE wasn't the OS of choice for the Dreamcast losing them millions?

They may not give a shit about individuals but when they've huge numbers of licences on the line, they suddenly become much more friendly.

​

I think that MS probably had the contracts all signed and the money in the bank before the first dreamcast hit the shelves... or even before the dev kits went out.

The difference here is that the GPL is a VERY friendly license and really doesn't ask for much out of you. It demands exactly nothing in advance, and only demands that people who recieve binary copies of GPL-derived work have the option to obtain a copy of the source thereafter. This is not hard to agree to. The whole time that you are developing you can keep the code locked up in a dafe somewhere, but when you ship it to your customers you need to let them have a copy, bugs and all.

I don't think that's too much to ask really, and I expect that GPH has just made a simple oversight in the rush to get a return on their development investment.

 

[garengarch]

Roll on HH, bugger off Linux.