Release new bare-bones web repo / mirror

[mcobit]

Also, if you sell the stuff for the prize you buy it in retail, how do you cover your taxes etc. that are necessary with a shop?


Is this even a legal company you are running there, selling software and hardware?

 

[sswam]

(1.) That's an assumption if I ever heard one.


...


I can understand ignoring the insults

What, like calling me an "ass"?


I have spoken to Terry, he said:

Heya!


I'm really glad that people are able to play VVVVVV on pandora, but


I'm afraid I just don't have the time to deal with more VVVVVV stuff


at this point Sorry...


- Terry

I'm ignoring the rest of your post, as you suggested. I don't like being insulted.

 

[mcobit]

If Terry says that he hasn't time to deal with it, I would assume, that he wants to deal with it PERSONALLY!

 

[sswam]

Also, if you sell the stuff for the prize you buy it in retail, how do you cover your taxes etc. that are necessary with a shop?


Is this even a legal company you are running there, selling software and hardware?

It is extremely legal at the moment because I have not as of yet sold anything.


I'm sure I will figure out the taxation aspect as needed, thank you for your concern.


Oh wait, you are just joining in to attack me because it's fun.

 

[sswam]

I am not going to respond to any more comments if I consider them to be negative or unsupportive.


I have better things to do, and you should learn how to be friendly before you talk to me.

 

[mcobit]

No, thats a real concern, as in Germany you can get into some trouble if you're selling stuff without doing your taxes.


Edit: Of course not, if you sell stuff privately on ebay or somesuch, but what you want to do seems to be a real business and shop.

 

[bismuthdrummer]

(1.) That's an assumption if I ever heard one.


...


I can understand ignoring the insults

What, like calling me an "ass"?


...


I'm ignoring the rest of your post, as you suggested. I don't like being insulted.

Assuming another person's wishes makes you an ass, yes.


But ok, you have permission to ignore my points and continue your intellectual irresponsibility.


Honestly, I find it a tad shocking you have the technical skill for these things but don't seem to have dealt with debates on this topic before...

 

[sswam]

I'm showing great self restraint here. Well done, DREDD.


Have you ever seen what happens when a stand-up comedian shreds a heckler?


You don't want to experience that now, do you?


In other news, and speaking of technical skill, I managed to get my SSL cert up and working for https://pandoria.org/


They don't make it all that easy for a dumbo like me to set up an HTTPS web service!


Aside from comedy and wrangling openssl, I have elite DNS skills too. Wrote my own DNS fuckulator (called freens) in my own programming language, to convert sensible key-value pair files into conforming BIND config files. I should have just used djbdns but didn't know of it yet. I can also host my own DNS alt-root by means of that tool.


I'm rambling. Well done for being nice to everyone, DREDD.

 

[Binky]

I am not going to respond to any more comments if I consider them to be negative or unsupportive. I have better things to do, and you should learn how to be friendly before you talk to me.

Most of the replies here are giving advice, rather than mindlessly shouting at you. Unless you have read up in copyright law, its quite possible that you're infringing somebody's rights when remixing/reselling other people's data.


A repo mirror is a good idea, but putting yourself on the IP firing line isn't. Making devs unhappy isn't a good idea either, even if you are within the law.


Redirecting all your downloads to the respective program's download page maybe a good idea.


I'm not saying this because I dislike you personally. Not because I'm jealous or a bully. Not even because I don't want you to be successful. Its because nobody wants to be on the wrong side of other people's lawyers.


Please understand that I want your site to get off to a good, start and am suggesting ways to achieve that; being on good terms with devs of one of those ways.

 

[ekianjo]

Milkshake has a nice little store. Someday one guy comes while milkshake is sleeping, copies everything in his store (even the stuff that was explicitly not authorized for distribution), and the next day opens a new one with the same offering.


Suddenly people who were distributing their stuff in milkshake's store notice it. Complaints and serious concerns arise.


The guy defends himself : "if you guys have a problem, come and contact me one by one and I'll see what I can do".


Of course, this is similar to a guy "borrowing" your bike and then telling you he can return it to you IF you ask him. That's not theft because we are in the digital world, but that's unauthorized distribution nonetheless.


When valid concerns are brought to the guy, his answer is "I'll ignore you, you are just a bunch of bullies! "


A better approach would be to ASK first ED/Milkshake if one can mirror the repo, and only distribute what is officially under GPL. And it it's not mentioned, one should not assumed it is re-distributable. After all, one can contact easily most maintainers on the repo, so one has no excuse not to do so.


Unintended consequence: I may stop releasing PNDs publicly in the future and just keep them for myself if noone can insure they are not going in the wild. I am looking at milkshake to prevent hard-linking and unauthorized mass-downloading, for example.

 

[sswam]

Unintended consequence: I may stop releasing PNDs publicly in the future and just keep them for myself if noone can insure they are not going in the wild.

I'd be sorry for that to happen. We need a non-free section.


As far as I can tell, most authors who release stuff free these days are very happy for it to be shared and re-distributed.


For example, the authors of all the tools and libraries you used to produce your PND are sharing free software:

[*]python is free software

[*]libgtk is free software

[*]libglib is free software

[*]OSS is free software (sort of)

[*]urllib2 is free software

[*]xml.dom is free software

[*]libcairo is free software

[*]gcc is free software (used to build python)

[*]Linux is free software

[*]mksquashfs is free software

[*]libpng is free software

[*]libpnd is free software

[*]Open Pandora operating system is free software

[*]libSDL is free software

[*]pygame is free software


https://www.youtube.com/embed/dRgP66XNIus?feature=oembed

<licenses>

	 <license name="Freeware" url="#" sourcecodeurl="#"/>

</licenses>

So "Freeware". Hmmm. That's not very clear is it? How am I supposed to know that unlike most freeware, YOUR special freeware is not freely redistributable? Do you seriously expect me to email every dev with an ambiguous license clause and ask them about every PND? OK, maybe I'll do that. I'll remind them every day that free software is better than "Freeware".


I already took down your PND, so please stop bothering me if for some reason you don't like me.

 

[sswam]

My sister wants to be a DJ.


I just wanna be a troll.

 

[Binky]

not the awful GPL that you mentioned.

I thought the GPL says you can modify, redistribute, or sell the software as long as you keep the licence the same


Whats bad about it for your purposes?

 

[Wootson]

Do you seriously expect me to email every dev with an ambiguous license clause and ask them about every PND? OK, maybe I'll do that. I'll remind them every day that free software is better than "Freeware".

Yes, that is how it works on this planet. Everything that is created is automatically copyrighted if there is no other explicit notice that it is not (Creative Commons, public domain, open source, whatever). If there is no license, it is copyrighted. If there is a license, make sure to read it very carefully and do everything the license tells you to do. You clearly did not read every license and do not respect the creators of Pandora software. The creators of Pandora software do not need to come to you to complain for copy/sharing violations, you must ask them first or respect a license. It really is that simple.


At least two creators/distributors of commercial Pandora software are now (more than) a little pissed off by your actions.

 

[ekianjo]

For example, the authors of all the tools and libraries you used to produce your PND are sharing free software:

[*]python is free software

[*]libgtk is free software

[*]libglib is free software

[*]OSS is free software (sort of)

[*]urllib2 is free software

[*]xml.dom is free software

[*]libcairo is free software

[*]gcc is free software (used to build python)

[*]Linux is free software

[*]mksquashfs is free software

[*]libpng is free software

[*]libpnd is free software

[*]Open Pandora operating system is free software

[*]libSDL is free software

[*]pygame is free software


https://www.youtube.com/embed/dRgP66XNIus?feature=oembed

And Wootson is dead correct on that. If you find a book and you do not find any mention of the license/author, do you assume it is ok to copy it?

 

[diligentcircle]

OK, I am disappoint...

I asked for complete removal. A link won't do it.


Hard-linking the repo should not be recommended anyway.


Anyway, no links, nothing.

I KNOW but I specifically asked for no links.


If you want to keep a link, then do not link to the download but link to the repo page where people can see the description of the application along with other update notices. That is the proper thing to do.

No matter how you look at it, posting a link is not copyright infringement. You can complain all you want, but no-one is legally obligated to not link to a download page.

This is not a case of you going to the supermarket and buying nachos and taking them to buddies place; this is a case of buying the nachos, putting them into a ziploc bag with some popcorn and writing 'jimmi's wicked combo' on it; the company who made the nachos may take issue with their brand being sullied like that.

That would not be illegal, nor would it be even remotely similar to copyright infringement. Nachos cannot be copyrighted; they are a physical object, not an authored work.

Am I even allowed to read the PXML, or would that level of reverse-engineering violate your rights? I'm being facetious, but I'm serious - you might object to any unpacking of your PND for all I know.

Reading is not something copyright forbids you from doing, ever, despite what J.K. Rowling thinks. The only time reading is illegal is when Digital Restrictions Management tries to prevent it (and that's because of laws like the DMCA, not copyright itself).

You seemed to think that you did not publish your source code, but there it is in the PND. It looks pretty good to me.

Isn't PandoraClock written in Python? Source files are what is run in that case (or bytecode files, which have the extension ".pyc" or ".pyo"). In any case, having source code available does not make a program free software.

 

[Wootson]

Posting a link on another website can cause excessive traffic if that website would be either very popular or attacked by an auto-click script or something similar. That's also something the original repository needs to address (don't know if that has been taken care of already).


The nacho example is definitely illegal, it's brand name theft and product theft combined in one. Otherwise everyone could be selling real Coca Cola in custom bottles. Try it, and see how long you last. You need to make a formula so different that it is not like the original. You cannot combine Coca Cola with peaches and call it Peacha Cola. Even with software you cannot use certain types of buttons, layouts, ways to interact, etcetera.


Anyway, Dredd (I Am The Law!) has written some things to not make me take this subject serious any longer.

 

[sswam]

I thought the GPL says you can modify, redistribute, or sell the software as long as you keep the licence the same


Whats bad about it for your purposes?

The GPL allows to share software, sort of, but it's not my favourite software license.


You can see Wootson's approach to copyright and remixing here:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/niPco_fLe-s?feature=oembed

I really like that video by the way, that's why I re-upped it.


Wootson seemed happy enough about the re-up previously.


If he changes his mind now, it will take a !@#$ big team of lawyers to get me to take it down!

 

[diligentcircle]

The nacho example is definitely illegal, it's brand name theft and product theft combined in one. Otherwise everyone could be selling real Coca Cola in custom bottles. Try it, and see how long you last. You need to make a formula so different that it is not like the original. You cannot combine Coca Cola with peaches and call it Peacha Cola. Even with software you cannot use certain types of buttons, layouts, ways to interact, etcetera.

Copyright doesn't restrict you in that way. I'm sorry, but if you buy a bag of chips, you are the owner of the chips. They are your property. It really doesn't matter if something copyrighted or trademarked is on the chip. It is perfectly legal to give them to your friends, or sell them, or whatever. Giving them a different name doesn't even come close to violating trademarks, either.


Regarding layouts and stuff in software, that's patents. Not copyright or trademarks.

The GPL allows to share software, sort of, but it's not my favourite software license.

That link is about Pascal, not the GPL, and doesn't mention the GPL anywhere that I can see.

 

[Wootson]

I thought the GPL says you can modify, redistribute, or sell the software as long as you keep the licence the same


Whats bad about it for your purposes?

The GPL allows to share software, sort of, but it's not my favourite software license.


You can see Wootson's approach to copyright and remixing here:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/niPco_fLe-s?feature=oembed

Please keep the discussion about you and your personal creations. Don't try to redirect attention to others, including me. It is you who is at fault here.


I'm also very educated on copyrighting and all kinds of laws regarding information technology. Remixing audio/video has been integrated/accepted into culture, but at the very core it is copyright infringement. We all know that, but until today there is no acceptable rights management system that is good for both parties on a mass scale without completely destroying the current situation.


You host whatever you want mate. It's your problem now. But as a matter of fact I do not like you displaying links to your store beneath that video. You also offer the video as a download, of which I do not approve as well, as I never did that myself either. It was only on YouTube and Dailymotion, from which you cannot download anything unless you uploaded it there yourself or without third party tools.