Slashdot Once More...

[Deed]

Seems to me that many people seem to want the GP2x to die by focussing on this issue. Why? It is impossible in the modern world to not violate copyright in some form - ever read a mate's magazine? Ever kept a tv program for more than 28 days? Are you using mp3's? Do you watch a dvd with your partner? DO YOU USE ROMS FOR EMULATION (eg on GP2x?).

​

Finally ! There is not only insane people here !!! :blink: I'm not alone
For the rest of you : please immediately erase all these stealed roms. I don't think you are all owning thousands jamma cards and megadrive cartridges, are you ? <_<

GP2X community is really a whiner's community. Sure, GPH must GPLd the source code, but you're going too far ...

 

[Radek]

And potentially kill the handheld.

Yes, I understand there is a large level of violation here, and DIGNSYS are to blame. I also acknowledge that GPH isn't leaning hard enough on them. But I really want the poor little 2x to flourish, and I feel that some of your steps are more likely to kill the 2x rather than help it's open sourcey nature.

Too much of everything isn't good. Asking the GPH is quite ok but making threats is not. We aren't here dealing with an elephant to use high caliber rifles. Not that I'm for violating the GPL but give it some time. Legal disputes can be proceeding for years and we don't want it. It'd be waste of resource for both sides without any gain to anyone. So GPH isn't behaving as it should? Not to be defending it too much but such things aren't uncommon for companies. Yes - they are making mistakes and sometimes they are very slowly fixing them too.

So wait for some time and see how it will unfold. After all GPH showed some signs of cooperating and eventually it will improve further.

 

[oneandoneis2]

Maybe it's all a cunning ploy to raise publicity for the GP2X by getting it repeatedly mentioned on /. and other such sites?

Incidentally, ROMs & MP3s aren't necessarily illegal - worldofspectrum.org, for instance, has hundreds if not thousands of ROMs which the owners have given permission to be distributed. And MP3s of your own CD collection, of course, are fair game.

 

[Mr.Jabberwocky]

DIGNSYS open all of kernel source for GP2X on our web site as follow GPL.
I guess, sombody talking the source that opend on our website was old one.
but, this is the same source code that release the GP2X in that time.
Then, why are you talk about violation of GPL ?
We are follow the GPL, and open the kernel that we have.

​

DIGNSYS are claiming they released the correct source at the time but someone downloaded an old version. This must be verifiable by a dev. Is their current download different from the one in the archive ?
I imagine if they do believe they are following the GPL and come to realise every binary requires a source release we will just end up getting fewer releases than we would otherwise.
They do seem to be trying to say they are concentrating on bugfixing rather than updating websites.
I can't see the point in trying to damage GPH over this. Muncher666 has some dialogue going with DIGNSYS. They may yet accept an offer of alternative free hosting.
I don't believe this fuss is good for the GP2X. I get the feeling some on here are more interested in the fight than getting a satisfatory outcome.

 

[Muncher666]

If ED, Cragix, Jr2swiss, snaff, Squidge, DJWillis, Franxis, Reesy, rlyeh, skeezix, pepone , and anybody else who's making GPH money collectivly agree to give GPH a deadline to come into complance, and if GPH fails to meet that deadline my suggestions happen -- I think GPH would come into complance rather than face utter faliure. I want from GPH not only the source, but a statement saying that everytime they make a binary release of the firmware they will also release the source code AT THE SAME TIME.

​

This suggestion I like. What do some of the afformentioned people think about this suggestion, anyway? I'd really like to hear from people like Craigix and skeezix on the matter.

Deed, GPL helps the develoers, which let people use better software. I can tell you that I DO NOT LIKE the idea of losing stuff over GPL, but I understand that with GPL enforcement in place that we will have much more quality releases in frequency. Try to understand things like this before you call people whiners (and I'm not saying there aren't some here. )

Allan.

 

[Captainbubby]

It is sad that it's come to this, though lets not argue amongst ourselves (I'm not saying anyone is arguing), we all want what's best for the devs, users and the gpx2.

I think GBH are naive aand DIGNSYS need to get their ass into gear

and mabye Anna Hong is doing this because she wants my body bad, and I'm already married?

 

[Silberstein]

Seems to me that many people seem to want the GP2x to die by focussing on this issue. Why? It is impossible in the modern world to not violate copyright in some form - ever read a mate's magazine? Ever kept a tv program for more than 28 days? Are you using mp3's? Do you watch a dvd with your partner? DO YOU USE ROMS FOR EMULATION (eg on GP2x?).

​

Finally ! There is not only insane people here !!! :blink: I'm not alone
For the rest of you : please immediately erase all these stealed roms. I don't think you are all owning thousands jamma cards and megadrive cartridges, are you ? <_<

GP2X community is really a whiner's community. Sure, GPH must GPLd the source code, but you're going too far ...

​

*Sighs* It's not about copyright, its about open source! I'm not one that usually calls people stupid, but this is a close call... Without the source code, we are totally dependent on Gamepark (Dignsys) for firmware bugfixes/improvements. The essense of the GPL is that free and open code should stay free and open.

 

[DijiTao]

I don't want a fight either - I just want the situation fixed. If the community gets GPH to comply, everybody wins. If however, people outside of the community go after GPH through the courts, Nobody wins. Do you really want this to go to court -- Where a judge will decide what happens? The argument comparing the thieving end users to the corporate thieving of GPL’d software for profit is just plain silly. There is no moral equality between the two.

Seems to me that many people seem to want the GP2x to die by focussing on this issue. Why? It is impossible in the modern world to not violate copyright in some form - ever read a mate's magazine? Ever kept a tv program for more than 28 days? Are you using mp3's? Do you watch a dvd with your partner? DO YOU USE ROMS FOR EMULATION (eg on GP2x?).

no you've missed the point. It is MORE like this situation:

you copy a mate's CD. Then you decide to sell it, and keep the money for yourself. Also you take you're mate's CD-burner so that he cannot encroach on your market, by selling his own copies.

​

Very well put.

 

[Muncher666]

I imagine if they do believe they are following the GPL and come to realise every binary requires a source release we will just end up getting fewer releases than we would otherwise.
They do seem to be trying to say they are concentrating on bugfixing rather than updating websites.
I can't see the point in trying to damage GPH over this. Muncher666 has some dialogue going with DIGNSYS. They may yet accept an offer of alternative free hosting.
I don't believe this fuss is good for the GP2X. I get the feeling some on here are more interested in the fight than getting a satisfatory outcome.

​

Well, I was getting quite frequent responses until I suggested this:

"Hi there.

That's fine, although we still want the source code available. I understand that you have no wish to spend money unnecessarily, but I (among many, many others) are willing to host it for free. We would even be willing for you to link to us on your site, so that people could directly download the source code this way.

Allan."

Do you think I was a bit abrupt, they went to lunch, or they just didn't like me giving them an ultimatum?

By the way, it is nice and refreshing to hear people giving a bit more credit to these guys. We're not dealing with Mr "640k should be enough for anybody" here.

Allan.

 

[BaDToaD]

Quite frankly I think this is the usual knee jerk reaction of the GPL crowd. They done exactly the same thing to Franxis and all he was trying to do was create a version of MAME for the GP32 and get a decent mark for his course work. He certainly didn't want to make any cash but that didn't stop the GPL bunch from hounding him into removing his binaries until the poor guy had time to tidy his code and document and release the source.

Cut GPH a little slack. If they've still not released current source in a month or so then start whinging but until then just be grateful for the GP2x for without GPH you'd have bugger all to whinge about at all.

 

[OrR]

I've noticed that there is a lot of freaking out going on here. As a consumer, I am annoyed that the device isn't fully compliant, but I think it's just plain stupid to want them to stop selling it. I am enjoying my GP2x, gpl compliance aside, and I'd be pissed (assuming I wanted one and was intending to buy one, I've already got one) if people stopped selling it BEFORE some sort of legal injunction over this.

New reply from dignsys:

"Dear Sir.

No, I mean, We have plan to release every one or two month.
Because, we are small and we do not have own web server, english and korean site is same.
So, we must send the file to our web administration company and they update the file.
Frankly speaking, We are spend many time and money to get available space on our web server to release the source.
whenever we request new update, we must give some charge to them too.

The version of source on our web is the source that release 11. 2005."

Calm down guys. This will be sorted (I'm an optimist), and I honestly think that the device hasn't really been out long enough to get this upset about it yet.

Allan.

EDIT: My reply:

"Hi there.

That's fine, although we still want the source code available. I understand that you have no wish to spend money unnecessarily, but I (among many, many others) are willing to host it for free. We would even be willing for you to link to us on your site, so that people could directly download the source code this way.

Allan."

​

Thanks for being one of the few sane people on this thread. I also wrote them a mail and got the same answer you got in your first mail. Did you get any more answers? It doesn't seem like the solution to this problem is too far away. We only need to communicate it properly.

Let's first think about this: What do we want? A full source release with ever new binary release, so much is clear. We need to establish a process to make this as easy as possible for the people at dignsys. The best would probably be to let them upload it to the archive. What other problems with the GPL are there? Which sources are missing? Are there any other requirements not met? If so, we need to tell them! We also need to keep contact with them so that such issues can be adressed faster in the future.

 

[DijiTao]

Cut them some slack? Fair Enough. However in exchange for not raising hell about this right now, I just want a date from GPH on when they will release the code, and I want from them a promise of the maximum amount of time between a binary release, and a source release will be. That seems very reasonable to me. What troubles me is to the best of my knowledge they have only released some alpha quality code that wasn't even complete, and they certaintly have not released everything they are obligated to release for even the 1.0.0 firmware.

 

[OrR]

Cut them some slack? Fair Enough. However in exchange for not raising hell about this right now, I just want a date from GPH on when they will release the code, and I want from them a promise of the maximum amount of time between a binary release, and a source release will be. That seems very reasonable to me. What troubles me is to the best of my knowledge they have only released some alpha quality code that wasn't even complete, and they certaintly have not released everything they are obligated to release for even the 1.0.0 firmware.

​

Did you tell them that?

 

[Muncher666]

Let's get a set of polite requests (or demands, if you are so inclined) written out, and then send them off to DIGNSYS, with explanation. Orr, thank you, I extend the same thanks for the same sort of courtesy. I have not gotten a response from them yet, but I can't be bothered waiting any longer. It's 3:30am over here, I'm going to bed. I'll be back with any responses I get in the morning.

Allan.

 

[BaDToaD]

Finally don't forget it was pressure from the community that more or less forced GPH into releasing a beta GP2x in the first place. All we were saying was "When is it going to be here, whinge whinge. Can't GPH get a move on whinge whinge." and now we're moaning because of this bug or that bug and because they haven't released the source? You can't have things both ways.

 

[EvilDragon]

I'm gonna offer them free bandwitdth and ab FTP-account tonight, then they CAN'T say it's the bandwidth anymore.

 

[saboteur]

just be grateful for the GP2x for without GPH you'd have bugger all to whinge about at all.

Yeah and GPH would be £300 ( i've got 2 ) worse off - this is no argument.

I don't want to see the GP2X, and by implication GPH, to fail. After all i've invested in the hardware. But the whole point of the GP2X was an Personal Entertainment System using open sourced software and for this to be the case, the source needs to be available and everything advertised needs to work.

I think dev's witholding thier own work is a reasonable point at this time - after all no software, no sales - unless GPH start employing loads of devs

I'm not a GPL crusader - I live in the real world where goal post's move and projects never meet the due date, I just don't like anyone taking the p***.

 

[skeezix]

*g* yeah, its _so_ hard to run a website.

Cost me $100 CDN/mo to keep up the codejedi site. Rough

You may recall myself in the past wishogn to not dev for the gp2x until they straightened out the GPL issues; they dived in, and ignore the parts that are inconveniant? No allowed.. but I'm doing my dev for the 2x for awhile since everyone sent me a unit, and it'd be awful for me to not do my part.

That said.. we'll all have to draw the line at some point. If they continue to not do the GPL right, they have to stop using the GPL'd code.. simple as that

Should get more interesting if the Slashdogs get on the tail

jeff

 

[Mr.Jabberwocky]

What troubles me is to the best of my knowledge they have only released some alpha quality code that wasn't even complete, and they certaintly have not released everything they are obligated to release for even the 1.0.0 firmware.

​

From 'to the best of my knowledge' I take it you have not checked if the current download is the one the community has or have even looked at this 'alpha quality code'. I imagined from your verbosity in this matter you were interested in the code so as to further develop it.

Looking at DIGNSYS's first reply to Muncher666 it is possible that they are trying to say the current release of source on their website is the current kernel.
From what I have read, not having upgraded from 1.00 yet, a lot of the chages have been in the launcher, media player etc. Are these covered by the GPL ? Also the issue's the firmware has such as the LCD problem's will be in drivers developed specifically for the GP2X, would they not ? Would they be covered by the GPL ?

 

[Silberstein]

I've noticed that there is a lot of freaking out going on here. As a consumer, I am annoyed that the device isn't fully compliant, but I think it's just plain stupid to want them to stop selling it. I am enjoying my GP2x, gpl compliance aside, and I'd be pissed (assuming I wanted one and was intending to buy one, I've already got one) if people stopped selling it BEFORE some sort of legal injunction over this.

New reply from dignsys:

"Dear Sir.

No, I mean, We have plan to release every one or two month.
Because, we are small and we do not have own web server, english and korean site is same.
So, we must send the file to our web administration company and they update the file.
Frankly speaking, We are spend many time and money to get available space on our web server to release the source.
whenever we request new update, we must give some charge to them too.

The version of source on our web is the source that release 11. 2005."

Calm down guys. This will be sorted (I'm an optimist), and I honestly think that the device hasn't really been out long enough to get this upset about it yet.

Allan.

EDIT: My reply:

"Hi there.

That's fine, although we still want the source code available. I understand that you have no wish to spend money unnecessarily, but I (among many, many others) are willing to host it for free. We would even be willing for you to link to us on your site, so that people could directly download the source code this way.

Allan."

​

That letter from dignsys is really puzzeling. South Korea has one of the worlds foremost communications infrastructure and bandwith is extremely cheap and availible. So my it seems to me, dignsys are either:

a) Plain stupid/incompentent.

b) Withholding the source for a reason.

It's just not sustainable to blame the "web administration company" when you have the best internet infrastructure in the world.