From william at gallaf.net Mon Aug 4 12:16:27 2008 From: william at gallaf.net (William Gallafent) Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 11:16:27 +0100 Subject: Acer Aspire One: GPL situation? Message-ID: I recently purchased one of these machines (manufactured by Acer, http://www.acer.co.uk/ ) which runs Linpus Linux Lite ( http://www.linpus.com/ ). It is a very nice piece of hardware, the price is right (?220), and it runs Linux. What's not to like? I now wish to see the source code for the GPL software which ships on it. There is a piece of paper in the box which says "The Linpux Linux GPL source can be downloaded from the website www.linpus.com." I have searched that web site, and cannot find a download location for the source code. So far, fairly unsatisfactory, since I would expect it to be a lot easier to locate the source code given the "written offer" quoted above. I have emailed Linpus and Acer, and await a response from either of them. I will update the list if I receive a response. As a footnote, the reason I want to look at the source code is to determine the configuration of the sound hardware, which is not working perfectly for me using ALSA of Xubuntu 8.04.1, nor ALSA 1.0.17. Additionally, with the shipped version of Linpus Linux the machine locks hard if the wifi is switched to adhoc mode, although it works with managed mode. With the latest MadWifi HAL and Xubuntu 8.04.1's stock kernel, it no longer locks hard, although I haven't actually got it to work yet. I just don't understand why, when the system ships with a recovery DVD (which has plenty of spare capacity), the source code for the whole shipping distribution isn't included in a subdirectory of the DVD - that would surely be the most straightforward way to provide it to end- users! As a second footnote, the piece of paper says "Copyright (C) 1997-2010 Linpus Technologies, Inc." - one can surely not claim copyright protection for a future date, since the copyright is intrinsically linked to the written text, which must by definition already have been written in 2008 ?? As a third, according to that document apparently "Linux" is a registered trademark of Linus Trovalds. Who he? ;) From armijn at uulug.nl Mon Aug 4 15:03:51 2008 From: armijn at uulug.nl (Armijn Hemel) Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:03:51 +0200 Subject: Acer Aspire One: GPL situation? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1217855031.2995.12.camel@hibbert.loco> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 11:16 +0100, William Gallafent wrote: > I recently purchased one of these machines (manufactured by Acer, http://www.acer.co.uk/ > ) which runs Linpus Linux Lite ( http://www.linpus.com/ ). It is a > very nice piece of hardware, the price is right (?220), and it runs > Linux. What's not to like? > > I now wish to see the source code for the GPL software which ships on > it. > > There is a piece of paper in the box which says "The Linpux Linux GPL > source can be downloaded from the website www.linpus.com." > > I have searched that web site, and cannot find a download location for > the source code. So far, fairly unsatisfactory, since I would expect > it to be a lot easier to locate the source code given the "written > offer" quoted above. I have emailed Linpus and Acer, and await a > response from either of them. I will update the list if I receive a > response. Hm, the FTP site appears to have stuff: ftp://ftp.linpus.com/ I don't know if that is what you are looking for. armijn -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From pbrobinson at gmail.com Mon Aug 4 15:00:21 2008 From: pbrobinson at gmail.com (Peter Robinson) Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 14:00:21 +0100 Subject: Acer Aspire One: GPL situation? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5256d0b0808040600h33ea7c25lb69b76aed77661a0@mail.gmail.com> If you go to ftp://ftp.linpus.com/dists/ there's all the src rpms there which have the source code. From memory of an interview with one of the Acer people its a distro derived from Fedora. I think you can use a tool like rpm2cpio to extract the src rpm on a debian based distro. It looks like the versions of the distro should be downloadable from links like http://www.linpus.com/xampp/modules/mydownloads/viewcat.php?cid=16 but the actual link to the download is broken. Peter On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 11:16 AM, William Gallafent wrote: > I recently purchased one of these machines (manufactured by Acer, > http://www.acer.co.uk/ ) which runs Linpus Linux Lite ( > http://www.linpus.com/ ). It is a very nice piece of hardware, the price is > right (?220), and it runs Linux. What's not to like? > > I now wish to see the source code for the GPL software which ships on it. > > There is a piece of paper in the box which says "The Linpux Linux GPL source > can be downloaded from the website www.linpus.com." > > I have searched that web site, and cannot find a download location for the > source code. So far, fairly unsatisfactory, since I would expect it to be a > lot easier to locate the source code given the "written offer" quoted above. > I have emailed Linpus and Acer, and await a response from either of them. I > will update the list if I receive a response. > > As a footnote, the reason I want to look at the source code is to determine > the configuration of the sound hardware, which is not working perfectly for > me using ALSA of Xubuntu 8.04.1, nor ALSA 1.0.17. Additionally, with the > shipped version of Linpus Linux the machine locks hard if the wifi is > switched to adhoc mode, although it works with managed mode. With the latest > MadWifi HAL and Xubuntu 8.04.1's stock kernel, it no longer locks hard, > although I haven't actually got it to work yet. > > I just don't understand why, when the system ships with a recovery DVD > (which has plenty of spare capacity), the source code for the whole shipping > distribution isn't included in a subdirectory of the DVD - that would surely > be the most straightforward way to provide it to end-users! > > As a second footnote, the piece of paper says "Copyright (C) 1997-2010 > Linpus Technologies, Inc." - one can surely not claim copyright protection > for a future date, since the copyright is intrinsically linked to the > written text, which must by definition already have been written in 2008 ?? > > As a third, according to that document apparently "Linux" is a registered > trademark of Linus Trovalds. Who he? ;) > From roberto.gordo at gmail.com Wed Aug 13 20:44:51 2008 From: roberto.gordo at gmail.com (Roberto Gordo Saez) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:44:51 +0200 Subject: Nokia SDK incomplete source code Message-ID: <20080813184451.GA12709@thing.nowhere> I would want to get your opinion in a particular case regarding the software for Nokia N810 (and other models) Internet Tables. In general, Nokia has done a remarkable task to comply with free licenses. I've been closely tracking their changes and it looks that they have reviewed most code in the base libraries, they got rid of any incompatible, suspicious or unclear code in many of them. They also ensured to remove all GPL code from libraries in order to be able to place their proprietary software on top. As usual, there are also borderline cases that may be GPL incompatibilities or not depending on the person that you ask (proprietary kernel modules, binary firmware and so on...) but I'm not focused on that. Instead, I would want to comment about another case. This is my analisys of the situation. I will quote fragments from the LGPL v2 along my comments: The library libesd.so is under the LGPL v2. It is inside the osso-esd package, which is based on the Enlightened Sound Daemon (EsoundD). Nokia modified and added code to the library, so it is a "work based on the Library". [...] A "work based on the Library" means either the Library or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Library or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated straightforwardly into another language. [...] The library has been modified in a way that requires some proprietary header files in order to compile. Those proprietary files are NOT "normally distributed with the major components of the operating system". In fact, they are not made available [1]. The LGPL allows, under certain conditions [2], to link proprietary executables to LGPL libraries. It is called a "work that uses the Library". Note the difference between that and a "work based on the Library". In this case, the library is combined with proprietary headers and a binary libesd.so is distributed to the users, which can't be compiled by anyone else with the provided sources. [...] 4. You may copy and distribute the Library (or a portion or derivative of it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange. [...] I think that Sections 1 and 2 are satisfied, but in my opinion the "complete corresponding machine-readable source code" requirement is not. Complete source code is defined in the LGPL v2 as: [...] For a library, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the library. [...] Also note that the LGPL license allows non-free programs to use free libraries, but the library internally has similar requirements than the GNU GPL; intended to preserve the freedom to modify, to make changes, and to be able to compile and to relink the program with the modified library [3]. It looks that nowhere in the LGPL text allows to modify an LGPL library and distribute a binary version that can't be recompiled from sources. Those headers should be made available under a license compatible with the LGPL v2 or, in case they don't want to release those headers, the library should be reworked as a "combined library", as defined in the Section 7 of the LGPL v2. The combined library should have a LGPL part that can be compiled and linked independently, and probably a proprietary part or another small library which make use of the propietary headers. There has been requests by some developers for those headers, but the response was "sorry, it is proprietary" [4]. Given the effort previously made by Nokia to remain relatively conforming to free licenses, I hope they will be willing to solve this issue if the problem is correctly exposed to them. Note that I'm Not A Lawyer, only an angry user tired of those companies. This is indeed a complicated case subject to other interpretations, so feel free to give me your comments; I will feel free to ignore them if don't like them :-) [5] I will do my best to bring back my right to modify, compile and install my modified libesd. Footnotes: [1] A very old version of those header files was made available (though under proprietary notices), and it is still available on the ftp: http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo/ossw/source/o/osso-dsp-headers/ It is not usable on the current version of the SDK. [2] Refer to LGPL v2 Section 5 for the list of conditions. [3] From the LGPL v2 preamble. [4] https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2271 Note that this bug report refers to the gst-plugins-dsp package, with has the same dependency, but it is made and copyrighted by Nokia, so the LGPL can't be enforced to their own code in this case. Anyways, a very unfortunate decision to distribute LGPL code that nobody except Nokia could really use under the full LGPL terms... [5] Just kidding, I'm interested in reading. From ninuxpdb at gmail.com Thu Aug 14 19:37:43 2008 From: ninuxpdb at gmail.com (paolo del bene) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 19:37:43 +0200 Subject: Nokia SDK incomplete source code In-Reply-To: <20080813184451.GA12709@thing.nowhere> References: <20080813184451.GA12709@thing.nowhere> Message-ID: <7dc12d290808141037q76adf1d5o4011ef80c6c9541a@mail.gmail.com> i received your e-mail about nokia 810, what really happened ? and why it does not distribute a copy of GNU/linux ? they say that is possibile to request a copy but really is not so, people that work inside nothing know that a copy of GNU/linux must to stay in the box, there is written only on the guide of nokia. maemo.org distribute a copy of GNU/linux and why not Nokia ? i got the nokia 770 is not there violation to have not distribute the source code ? nokia could put on cvs, ftp, svn, http all the material necessary and to do mirrors in the world. awaiting your reply, paolo del bene 2008/8/13, Roberto Gordo Saez : > I would want to get your opinion in a particular case regarding > the software for Nokia N810 (and other models) Internet Tables. > > In general, Nokia has done a remarkable task to comply with > free licenses. I've been closely tracking their changes and it > looks that they have reviewed most code in the base libraries, > they got rid of any incompatible, suspicious or unclear code in > many of them. They also ensured to remove all GPL code from > libraries in order to be able to place their proprietary > software on top. > > As usual, there are also borderline cases that may be GPL > incompatibilities or not depending on the person that you ask > (proprietary kernel modules, binary firmware and so on...) but > I'm not focused on that. Instead, I would want to comment about > another case. This is my analisys of the situation. I will quote > fragments from the LGPL v2 along my comments: > > The library libesd.so is under the LGPL v2. It is inside the > osso-esd package, which is based on the Enlightened Sound Daemon > (EsoundD). Nokia modified and added code to the library, so it > is a "work based on the Library". > > [...] A "work based on the Library" means either the Library > or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, > a work containing the Library or a portion of it, either > verbatim or with modifications and/or translated > straightforwardly into another language. [...] > > The library has been modified in a way that requires some > proprietary header files in order to compile. Those proprietary > files are NOT "normally distributed with the major components of > the operating system". In fact, they are not made available [1]. > > The LGPL allows, under certain conditions [2], to link > proprietary executables to LGPL libraries. It is called a "work > that uses the Library". Note the difference between that and a > "work based on the Library". In this case, the library is > combined with proprietary headers and a binary libesd.so is > distributed to the users, which can't be compiled by anyone else > with the provided sources. > > [...] 4. You may copy and distribute the Library (or a > portion or derivative of it, under Section 2) in object code > or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above > provided that you accompany it with the complete > corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be > distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a > medium customarily used for software interchange. [...] > > I think that Sections 1 and 2 are satisfied, but in my opinion > the "complete corresponding machine-readable source code" > requirement is not. Complete source code is defined in the > LGPL v2 as: > > [...] For a library, complete source code means all the > source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated > interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control > compilation and installation of the library. [...] > > Also note that the LGPL license allows non-free programs to use > free libraries, but the library internally has similar > requirements than the GNU GPL; intended to preserve the freedom > to modify, to make changes, and to be able to compile and to > relink the program with the modified library [3]. > > It looks that nowhere in the LGPL text allows to modify an LGPL > library and distribute a binary version that can't be recompiled > from sources. Those headers should be made available under a > license compatible with the LGPL v2 or, in case they don't want > to release those headers, the library should be reworked as a > "combined library", as defined in the Section 7 of the LGPL v2. > The combined library should have a LGPL part that can be > compiled and linked independently, and probably a proprietary > part or another small library which make use of the propietary > headers. > > There has been requests by some developers for those headers, > but the response was "sorry, it is proprietary" [4]. Given the > effort previously made by Nokia to remain relatively conforming > to free licenses, I hope they will be willing to solve this > issue if the problem is correctly exposed to them. > > Note that I'm Not A Lawyer, only an angry user tired of those > companies. This is indeed a complicated case subject to other > interpretations, so feel free to give me your comments; I will > feel free to ignore them if don't like them :-) [5] I will do > my best to bring back my right to modify, compile and install my > modified libesd. > > > Footnotes: > > [1] A very old version of those header files was made available > (though under proprietary notices), and it is still > available on the ftp: > http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo/ossw/source/o/osso-dsp-headers/ > It is not usable on the current version of the SDK. > > [2] Refer to LGPL v2 Section 5 for the list of conditions. > > [3] From the LGPL v2 preamble. > > [4] https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2271 > Note that this bug report refers to the gst-plugins-dsp > package, with has the same dependency, but it is made and > copyrighted by Nokia, so the LGPL can't be enforced to their > own code in this case. Anyways, a very unfortunate decision > to distribute LGPL code that nobody except Nokia could really > use under the full LGPL terms... > > [5] Just kidding, I'm interested in reading. > > > From roberto.gordo at gmail.com Fri Aug 15 01:01:46 2008 From: roberto.gordo at gmail.com (Roberto Gordo Saez) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 01:01:46 +0200 Subject: Nokia SDK incomplete source code In-Reply-To: <7dc12d290808141037q76adf1d5o4011ef80c6c9541a@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080813184451.GA12709@thing.nowhere> <7dc12d290808141037q76adf1d5o4011ef80c6c9541a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080814230146.GA10605@thing.nowhere> On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 07:37:43PM +0200, paolo del bene wrote: > i received your e-mail about nokia 810, what really happened ? and why > it does not distribute a copy of GNU/linux ? they say that is > possibile to request a copy but really is not so, people that work > inside nothing know that a copy of GNU/linux must to stay in the box, > there is written only on the guide of nokia. [...] Hi. In general terms the SDK provided by Nokia is OK. My complain is for a very concrete case, just one library (libesd) that can't be compiled because of some header files kept proprietary and secret. AFAIK sources for everything else (kernel, libraries) are included, distributed by Nokia and look perfectly good. Unless you want to modify that concrete library, you problably won't notice those missing files and you could use the SDK normally, so don't be alarmed, it's not so bad. From armijn at uulug.nl Tue Aug 19 15:06:23 2008 From: armijn at uulug.nl (Armijn Hemel) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:06:23 +0200 Subject: Nokia SDK incomplete source code In-Reply-To: <20080814230146.GA10605@thing.nowhere> References: <20080813184451.GA12709@thing.nowhere> <7dc12d290808141037q76adf1d5o4011ef80c6c9541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080814230146.GA10605@thing.nowhere> Message-ID: <1219151183.2881.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> hi, > AFAIK sources for everything else (kernel, libraries) are > included, distributed by Nokia and look perfectly good. Unless > you want to modify that concrete library, you problably won't > notice those missing files and you could use the SDK normally, > so don't be alarmed, it's not so bad. We took this up with Nokia. Their official response is: "Based on our internal review with tech guys it seems that there has been an human error on Nokia side. Corrective actions have been taken to open the header files for developers. This will happen in next few days." So that should be fixed very soon. armijn -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From dia_tn at yahoo.fr Tue Aug 19 13:39:01 2008 From: dia_tn at yahoo.fr (dhiaeddine) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:39:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: ASTARO not making sources available Message-ID: <816775.81826.qm@web23208.mail.ird.yahoo.com> hi everybody, I asked astaro for a link to the source code of the astaro security gateway based on Linux and various open source projects but they rejected my request. what the community can do with astaro gmbh to get access to the gpl code? here's the reponse I've got : > De: Astaro Support > Objet: Re: [Ticket#2008081810000697] sources for opensource code in astaro firewall (Encryption: None) > ?: dia_tn at yahoo.fr > Date: Mardi 19 Ao?t 2008, 11h06 > Hello, > > Astaro is working closely with the open source community to > develop its > products. > > Open source projects that are sponsored or supported by > Astaro include: > Netfilter, ClamAV, Openswan, strongSwan, and OpenVPN. > > I'm sorry, but we can't send you our > open-source-code of astaro security > gateway. > > Thank you very much for your understanding. > > Mit freundlichen Gr??en / Kind regards, > > Astaro Technical Support Team > > Stefan Vogt > > -- > Astaro Support | support at astaro.com | www.astaro.com | > Phone +49-721-25516-300 | Fax ?200 | Amalienbadstra?e 36 > / Bau 33a | > 76227 Karlsruhe | Germany > > ? Download your free 30 day trial version of the > award-winning UTM solution > Astaro Security Gateway: http://www.astaro.com/download > > --------- > Astaro AG > Executive Board: Markus Hennig, Jan Hichert, Ludwig Lutter > Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Stanley J. Krasnow > Headquarter Location: Karlsruhe > Commercial Register: Mannheim HRB 108997 _____________________________________________________________________________ Envoyez avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail.yahoo.fr From coughlan at fsfeurope.org Tue Aug 19 15:33:41 2008 From: coughlan at fsfeurope.org (Shane Martin Coughlan) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:33:41 +0200 Subject: Nokia SDK incomplete source code In-Reply-To: <1219151183.2881.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080813184451.GA12709@thing.nowhere> <7dc12d290808141037q76adf1d5o4011ef80c6c9541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080814230146.GA10605@thing.nowhere> <1219151183.2881.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <48AACBB5.5040007@fsfeurope.org> Hi guys Armijn Hemel wrote: >> AFAIK sources for everything else (kernel, libraries) are >> included, distributed by Nokia and look perfectly good. Unless >> you want to modify that concrete library, you problably won't >> notice those missing files and you could use the SDK normally, >> so don't be alarmed, it's not so bad. > > We took this up with Nokia. Their official response is: > "Based on our internal review with tech guys it seems that there has > been an human error on Nokia side. Corrective actions have been taken to > open the header files for developers. This will happen in next few > days." > So that should be fixed very soon. Thanks Armijn. Roberto, thanks for your clear report of the potential problem. It made is easier for everyone to analyse the situation. Kudos also to Nokia for a speedy investigation and resolution. Shane -- Shane Coughlan FTF Coordinator Free Software Foundation Europe Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406 coughlan at fsfeurope.org Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org From twaffle at gmail.com Tue Aug 19 15:40:04 2008 From: twaffle at gmail.com (Thomas Charron) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:40:04 -0400 Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <816775.81826.qm@web23208.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <816775.81826.qm@web23208.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:39 AM, dhiaeddine wrote: > hi everybody, > I asked astaro for a link to the source code of the astaro security gateway based on Linux and various open source projects but they rejected my request. > what the community can do with astaro gmbh to get access to the gpl code? > here's the reponse I've got : Wow, that was a pretty big bugger off they sent you. I'd also recommend you also respond to the Netfilter, ClamAV, Openswan, Strongswan, and OpenVPN groups they sponser. :-D -- -- Thomas From roberto.gordo at gmail.com Tue Aug 19 17:12:05 2008 From: roberto.gordo at gmail.com (Roberto Gordo Saez) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:12:05 +0200 Subject: Nokia SDK incomplete source code In-Reply-To: <1219151183.2881.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080813184451.GA12709@thing.nowhere> <7dc12d290808141037q76adf1d5o4011ef80c6c9541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080814230146.GA10605@thing.nowhere> <1219151183.2881.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20080819151205.GA6581@thing.nowhere> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 03:06:23PM +0200, Armijn Hemel wrote: > We took this up with Nokia. Their official response is: > > "Based on our internal review with tech guys it seems that there has > been an human error on Nokia side. Corrective actions have been taken to > open the header files for developers. This will happen in next few > days." > > So that should be fixed very soon. Wow! Thank you! The friendly and cooperative attitude of Nokia is very possitive. Now I can only wish that they will publish as GPL the proprietary daemons and libraries made by Nokia for those devices... just dreaming ;-) From joseph at heenan.me.uk Tue Aug 19 16:57:18 2008 From: joseph at heenan.me.uk (Joseph Heenan) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:57:18 +0100 Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> References: <816775.81826.qm@web23208.mail.ird.yahoo.com> <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <48AADF4E.5080309@heenan.me.uk> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:39 AM, dhiaeddine wrote: >> hi everybody, >> I asked astaro for a link to the source code of the astaro security gateway based on Linux and various open source projects but they rejected my request. >> what the community can do with astaro gmbh to get access to the gpl code? >> here's the reponse I've got : What was the request you sent them? Was it clear exactly what you were asking for? Have you purchased their product or otherwise received GPL binaries from them? Joseph From dia_tn at yahoo.fr Tue Aug 19 19:18:20 2008 From: dia_tn at yahoo.fr (dhiaeddine) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:18:20 +0000 (GMT) Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <48AADF4E.5080309@heenan.me.uk> Message-ID: <933975.16927.qm@web23206.mail.ird.yahoo.com> binaries for both open source and proprietary parts are available for -temporary licensed- download after registration. I simply asked them for a download link for the sources of the open source part of the soft. I didn't purchase anything from astaro. --- En date de : Mar 19.8.08, Joseph Heenan a ?crit : > De: Joseph Heenan > Objet: Re: ASTARO not making sources available > ?: legal at lists.gpl-violations.org > Date: Mardi 19 Ao?t 2008, 16h57 > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:39 AM, dhiaeddine > wrote: > >> hi everybody, > >> I asked astaro for a link to the source code of > the astaro security gateway based on Linux and various open > source projects but they rejected my request. > >> what the community can do with astaro gmbh to get > access to the gpl code? > >> here's the reponse I've got : > > What was the request you sent them? Was it clear exactly > what you were > asking for? Have you purchased their product or otherwise > received GPL > binaries from them? > > Joseph _____________________________________________________________________________ Envoyez avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail.yahoo.fr From armijn at uulug.nl Tue Aug 19 19:22:01 2008 From: armijn at uulug.nl (Armijn Hemel) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:22:01 +0200 Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <933975.16927.qm@web23206.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <933975.16927.qm@web23206.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1219166521.2862.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 17:18 +0000, dhiaeddine wrote: > > binaries for both open source and proprietary parts are available for > -temporary licensed- download after registration. I simply asked them > for a download link for the sources of the open source part of the > soft. I didn't purchase anything from astaro. If I understood it correctly Astaro has a written offer, which is perfectly OK under GPLv2 section 3b. armijn -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From dia_tn at yahoo.fr Tue Aug 19 19:33:05 2008 From: dia_tn at yahoo.fr (dhiaeddine) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:33:05 +0000 (GMT) Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <1219166521.2862.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <184302.76123.qm@web23202.mail.ird.yahoo.com> yes they have it written in the astaro license, the support team didn't tell me it's available on cd with charge upon request. --- En date de : Mar 19.8.08, Armijn Hemel a ?crit : > De: Armijn Hemel > Objet: Re: ASTARO not making sources available > ?: dia_tn at yahoo.fr > Cc: legal at lists.gpl-violations.org > Date: Mardi 19 Ao?t 2008, 19h22 > On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 17:18 +0000, dhiaeddine wrote: > > > > binaries for both open source and proprietary parts > are available for > > -temporary licensed- download after registration. I > simply asked them > > for a download link for the sources of the open source > part of the > > soft. I didn't purchase anything from astaro. > > If I understood it correctly Astaro has a written offer, > which is > perfectly OK under GPLv2 section 3b. > > armijn > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht > Linux Users Group > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- _____________________________________________________________________________ Envoyez avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail.yahoo.fr From armijn at uulug.nl Tue Aug 19 19:46:44 2008 From: armijn at uulug.nl (Armijn Hemel) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:46:44 +0200 Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <184302.76123.qm@web23202.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <184302.76123.qm@web23202.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1219168004.2862.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 17:33 +0000, dhiaeddine wrote: > yes they have it written in the astaro license, the support team > didn't tell me it's available on cd with charge upon request. So that sounds more like a problem of properly training their stuff. You can't catch that in a software license ;-) armijn -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From dia_tn at yahoo.fr Tue Aug 19 19:55:37 2008 From: dia_tn at yahoo.fr (dhiaeddine) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:55:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <1219168004.2862.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <35251.57761.qm@web23203.mail.ird.yahoo.com> --- En date de : Mar 19.8.08, Armijn Hemel a ?crit : > De: Armijn Hemel > Objet: Re: ASTARO not making sources available > ?: dia_tn at yahoo.fr > Cc: legal at lists.gpl-violations.org > Date: Mardi 19 Ao?t 2008, 19h46 > On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 17:33 +0000, dhiaeddine wrote: > > yes they have it written in the astaro license, the > support team > > didn't tell me it's available on cd with > charge upon request. > > So that sounds more like a problem of properly training > their stuff. You > can't catch that in a software license ;-) > > armijn > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht > Linux Users Group > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- _____________________________________________________________________________ Envoyez avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail.yahoo.fr From mrintegrity at gmail.com Tue Aug 19 18:43:19 2008 From: mrintegrity at gmail.com (mr) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:43:19 +0200 Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> References: <816775.81826.qm@web23208.mail.ird.yahoo.com> <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5dfaf390808190943v5dcb36bbx12e8f147d7b96cac@mail.gmail.com> Are they implying that they have permission to use the source code in this way? I find that unlikely On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Thomas Charron wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:39 AM, dhiaeddine wrote: > > hi everybody, > > I asked astaro for a link to the source code of the astaro security > gateway based on Linux and various open source projects but they rejected my > request. > > what the community can do with astaro gmbh to get access to the gpl code? > > here's the reponse I've got : > > Wow, that was a pretty big bugger off they sent you. I'd also > recommend you also respond to the Netfilter, ClamAV, Openswan, > Strongswan, and OpenVPN groups they sponser. :-D > > -- > -- Thomas > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/legal/attachments/20080819/5e8065ee/attachment.htm From dave123_aml at yahoo.com Tue Aug 19 17:44:40 2008 From: dave123_aml at yahoo.com (David Anders) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:44:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <307799.680.qm@web54410.mail.yahoo.com> if they are using busybox, i'd also contact The Software Freedom Law Center. they are on retainer for doing GPL issues related to busybox. dave --- On Tue, 8/19/08, Thomas Charron wrote: > From: Thomas Charron > Subject: Re: ASTARO not making sources available > To: dia_tn at yahoo.fr > Cc: legal at lists.gpl-violations.org > Date: Tuesday, August 19, 2008, 8:40 AM > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:39 AM, dhiaeddine > wrote: > > hi everybody, > > I asked astaro for a link to the source code of the > astaro security gateway based on Linux and various open > source projects but they rejected my request. > > what the community can do with astaro gmbh to get > access to the gpl code? > > here's the reponse I've got : > > Wow, that was a pretty big bugger off they sent you. > I'd also > recommend you also respond to the Netfilter, ClamAV, > Openswan, > Strongswan, and OpenVPN groups they sponser. :-D > > -- > -- Thomas From cdibona at gmail.com Tue Aug 19 19:02:25 2008 From: cdibona at gmail.com (Chris DiBona) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:02:25 -0700 Subject: ASTARO not making sources available In-Reply-To: <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> References: <816775.81826.qm@web23208.mail.ird.yahoo.com> <30dfe2a80808190640j41eca9a4ia5f7c2ae03463f67@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7d9492d90808191002y535916c9l6853244c508e1c8d@mail.gmail.com> Please, that's not so bad. We've seen way worse :-) chris On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:40 AM, Thomas Charron wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:39 AM, dhiaeddine wrote: > > hi everybody, > > I asked astaro for a link to the source code of the astaro security > gateway based on Linux and various open source projects but they rejected my > request. > > what the community can do with astaro gmbh to get access to the gpl code? > > here's the reponse I've got : > > Wow, that was a pretty big bugger off they sent you. I'd also > recommend you also respond to the Netfilter, ClamAV, Openswan, > Strongswan, and OpenVPN groups they sponser. :-D > > -- > -- Thomas > > -- Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc. Google's Open Source program can be found at http://code.google.com Personal Weblog: http://dibona.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/legal/attachments/20080819/6da85f7e/attachment.htm From nastoragegplviolation at gmail.com Thu Aug 21 09:06:07 2008 From: nastoragegplviolation at gmail.com (nastorage gpl violation) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:06:07 +0800 Subject: Violations of the GNU Licenses - Ingrasys Technology Inc. In-Reply-To: <84ec8abb0808202248y18e71305q65381b3780804286@mail.gmail.com> References: <84ec8abb0808202248y18e71305q65381b3780804286@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <84ec8abb0808210006l16cd4257r817a0fd3bcd0ea3f@mail.gmail.com> template from http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html -- If you think you see a violation of the GNU GPL, LGPL, AGPL, or FDL, the first thing you should do is double-check the facts: * Does the distribution contain a copy of the License? _No_ * Does it clearly state which software is covered by the License? _No_ Does it say anything misleading, perhaps giving the impression that something is covered by the License when in fact it is not? * Is source code included in the distribution? _No_ * Is a written offer for source code included with a distribution of just binaries? _just binaries_ * Is the available source code complete, or is it designed for linking in other non-free modules? If there seems to be a real violation, the next thing you need to do is record the details carefully: * the precise name of the product NAStorage series firmware http://www.ingrasys.com/downsupport/nas/ds_nas.aspx?itemis=Firmware ftp://web:nbupm at download.ingrasys.com/data01/ * the name of the person or organization distributing it Ingrasys Technology Inc. * email addresses, postal addresses and phone numbers for how to contact the distributor(s) http://www.ingrasys.com/ Email for technical support: support at ingrasys.com Email for sales & info: sales at Ingrasys.com Address : 21F , No.207, Fu Hsing RD. Tao-Yuan 33066, Taiwan , R.O.C. Tel: 886-3-3362688 Fax: 886-3-3359522 * the exact name of the package whose license is violated Linux Kernel, kernel modules, and others inside the firmware. * how the license was violated: o Is the copyright notice of the copyright holder included? _No_ o Is the source code completely missing? _Yes_ o Does the written offer for source, if given, only give a website and/or FTP site where to download the source? o Is there a copy of the license included in the distribution? _No_ o Is some of the source available, but not all? If so, what parts are missing? From laitcg at gmail.com Fri Aug 22 19:39:06 2008 From: laitcg at gmail.com (Jack S. Lai) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:39:06 -0400 Subject: "Many" Message-ID: <87f10eb50808221039p17d7e43fw5e37400b4d276ff1@mail.gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - From a concerned person associated with one of my programs: > Hi Jack: > > I suppose you'll remember me. > > I'm and worked at in Valencia (Spain). > > It's more than one year I don't work at anymore but I want you > to know something I think it's happenning. > > is selling a product called , you can take a > look at: > It seems that they are selling this product all over Europe (Germany, > Portugal, ...) but I don't see anything about GPL License so it > makes me think that they are violating it. > I can certainly tell you that the core is GPL because it's based on > many GPL programs (yours and other's). I sent the company in question an email as follows: > It is my understanding that this product contains GPL[1] programs and > even modified copies of GPL'd programs. That's very good. Where > might I get a copy of the source code of only the GPL licensed > programs? Is this available anywhere? > > Thank you very much. > > [1] "General Public License" http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html I have received no reply. I asked the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) about this and they said: "For your particular case, since the locus of infringing activity is outside of the United States, we cannot offer to represent you directly, since we are only American lawyers. If the violator has been unacceptably responsive to your demands, then you should consider retaining counsel in your jurisdiction to represent you in asserting your rights against the violator." I am asking on this list what I might do now. Of course, specific info is available upon request. Thank you. - -- When you want a computer system that works, just choose Linux. When you want a computer system that works, just, choose Microsoft. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://getfiregpg.org iEYEARECAAYFAkiu+ZgACgkQ9/VKdZrnv3a6RQCdEqcBIb10jLhijgX7CkaB++8+ JKIAn2GcVvg5aEcvomrLu26jCf7q2yrw =v70I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From laitcg at gmail.com Fri Aug 22 20:24:34 2008 From: laitcg at gmail.com (Jack S. Lai) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:24:34 -0400 Subject: Resend: "Many" GPL violations Message-ID: <87f10eb50808221124g7238a940md6037c931f009e73@mail.gmail.com> >From a concerned person associated with one of my programs: > Hi Jack: > > I suppose you'll remember me. > > I'm (redacted) and worked at (redacted) in Valencia (Spain). > > It's more than one year I don't work at (redacted) anymore > but I want you to know something I think it's happenning. > > (redacted) is selling a product called (redacted), you can > take a look at: (snip) > It seems that they are selling this product all over Europe > (Germany, Portugal, ...) but I don't see anything about GPL > License so it makes me think that they are violating it. > > I can certainly tell you that the core is GPL because it's > based on many GPL programs (yours and other's). I sent the company in question an email as follows: (snip) > It is my understanding that this product contains GPL[1] > programs and even modified copies of GPL'd programs. > That's very good. Where might I get a copy of the source > code of only the GPL licensed programs? Is this available > anywhere? > > Thank you very much. > > [1] "General Public License" > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html I have received no reply. I asked the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) about this and they said: "For your particular case, since the locus of infringing activity is outside of the United States, we cannot offer to represent you directly, since we are only American lawyers. If the violator has been unacceptably responsive to your demands, then you should consider retaining counsel in your jurisdiction to represent you in asserting your rights against the violator." I am asking on this list what I might do now. Of course, specific info is available upon request. Thank you. -- When you want a computer system that works, just choose inux. When you want a computer system that works, just, choose Microsoft. From armijn at uulug.nl Fri Aug 22 23:03:59 2008 From: armijn at uulug.nl (Armijn Hemel) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:03:59 +0200 Subject: Resend: "Many" GPL violations In-Reply-To: <87f10eb50808221124g7238a940md6037c931f009e73@mail.gmail.com> References: <87f10eb50808221124g7238a940md6037c931f009e73@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1219439039.2815.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> hi, > I am asking on this list what I might do now. Of course, > specific info is available upon request. >From http://www.gpl-violations.org/support.html "We also appreciate any information you might have about potential GPL abuses / misuses. Please be as specific as possible about the particular product, it's availability, which free software is used, ... Please report any such violations to license-violation at gpl-violations.org." armijn -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From vinz.focker at gmail.com Tue Aug 26 14:31:00 2008 From: vinz.focker at gmail.com (Vinz Focker) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:31:00 +0200 Subject: iPhone/iPod Applications in Apple App Store Message-ID: <4b126e1e0808260531k198686d4ice0611f7a1377ff6@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I've come along several applications in Apple's App Store that clearly derive from open source applications. None of these vendors is making the source code available with their product or include a written offer. They also do not include a copy of the GPL and they don't indicate that the apps contain GPL software. For one specific application I've collected concrete evidence and wrote to the software vendor. I told the vendor that public disclosure has not been made and asked this vendor for his point of view. Surprisingly I got a answer within a few hours. The vendor indirectly acknowledged that the application was derived from that GPL software but wrote that a lot of code had to be changed because the iPhone environment is very different from UNIX and therefore he does not see a violation of the GPL (... welll, no comment on that.) . In addition the vendor wrote that they cannot release the source, as the license with Apple, does not allow any source relating to the Apple API to be released or discussed. Can anybody point me to the correct direction how to continue from here? Should I continue the communication with the vendor or should I just disclose my findings to license-violation at gpl-violations.org ? Many Thanks, Vinz F. From armijn at uulug.nl Tue Aug 26 16:00:08 2008 From: armijn at uulug.nl (Armijn Hemel) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:00:08 +0200 Subject: iPhone/iPod Applications in Apple App Store In-Reply-To: <4b126e1e0808260531k198686d4ice0611f7a1377ff6@mail.gmail.com> References: <4b126e1e0808260531k198686d4ice0611f7a1377ff6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1219759208.2981.71.camel@hibbert.loco> On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 14:31 +0200, Vinz Focker wrote: > Can anybody point me to the correct direction how to continue from > here? > Should I continue the communication with the vendor or should I just > disclose my findings to license-violation at gpl-violations.org ? Yes. armijn -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From armijn at uulug.nl Tue Aug 26 16:40:32 2008 From: armijn at uulug.nl (Armijn Hemel) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:40:32 +0200 Subject: iPhone/iPod Applications in Apple App Store In-Reply-To: <4b126e1e0808260737n4d71cb58i1924ff3d5ed58111@mail.gmail.com> References: <4b126e1e0808260531k198686d4ice0611f7a1377ff6@mail.gmail.com> <1219759208.2981.71.camel@hibbert.loco> <4b126e1e0808260737n4d71cb58i1924ff3d5ed58111@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1219761632.2981.85.camel@hibbert.loco> On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 16:37 +0200, Vinz Focker wrote: > ;) Yes disclose or yes continue communication with vendor ? Disclose it to license-violation at gpl-violations.org please. armijn -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From vinz.focker at gmail.com Tue Aug 26 16:37:27 2008 From: vinz.focker at gmail.com (Vinz Focker) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:37:27 +0200 Subject: iPhone/iPod Applications in Apple App Store In-Reply-To: <1219759208.2981.71.camel@hibbert.loco> References: <4b126e1e0808260531k198686d4ice0611f7a1377ff6@mail.gmail.com> <1219759208.2981.71.camel@hibbert.loco> Message-ID: <4b126e1e0808260737n4d71cb58i1924ff3d5ed58111@mail.gmail.com> ;) Yes disclose or yes continue communication with vendor ? On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Armijn Hemel wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 14:31 +0200, Vinz Focker wrote: >> Can anybody point me to the correct direction how to continue from >> here? >> Should I continue the communication with the vendor or should I just >> disclose my findings to license-violation at gpl-violations.org ? > > Yes. > > armijn > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > armijn at uulug.nl | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > From erik_warner_tx at yahoo.com Sat Aug 30 04:07:50 2008 From: erik_warner_tx at yahoo.com (Erik Warner) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:07:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Apple is violating the GPL with its Mac OS X EULA and lawsuit against Psystar Message-ID: <107636.1230.qm@web45314.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Hi, Apple filed a suit against computer maker Psystar for selling computers preloaded with legally-purchased copies of Mac OS X. Apple is basing the suit on Mac OS X's restrictive EULA, which attempts to prohibit installing Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. The problem for Apple is that Mac OS X includes software licensed under the GPLv2 and LGPLv2, both of which expressly prohibit placing additional restrictions on software covered by the GPLv2 and LGPLv2. Apple's attempt to place a restrictive EULA on software they do *NOT* own copyright to, software whose licenses (GPLv2 and LGPLv2) expressly prohibit placing additional restrictions on downstream recipients, constitutes a massive violation of the GPLv2 and LGPLv2. The preamble of the GPLv2 states that: "if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have." Section 6 of the GPLv2 states that: "6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." Similarly, the preamble of the LGPLv2 states that: "if you distribute copies of the library, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that we gave you." Section 10 of the LGPLv2 states that: "10. Each time you redistribute the Library (or any work based on the Library), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute, link with or modify the Library subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." Apple's EULA clearly imposes "further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted" in the GPLv2 and LGPLv2, and as such is in direct contradiction with Section 6 and Section 10 of the respective licenses. Even if we were to incorrectly assume that Apple owned 100% of the copyright to Mac OS X, the courts might still strike down the EULA as unenforceable under contract law or as violating antitrust law. However, these arguments are not what I'm talking about in this email. What I'm saying is that, regardless of the validity of the contract law and antitrust law arguments, Apple's Mac OS X EULA violates the GPLv2 and LGPLv2. By applying the restrictive EULA to software licensed under the GPLv2 and LGPLv2, Apple is infringing on the copyrights of the authors of the GPLv2- and LGPLv2-licensed software included in Mac OS X. By forcing recipients of Mac OS X to agree to the EULA in order to use the installation CD, Apple deceived the recipients into thinking they don't have the rights to which the GPLv2 and LGPLv2 entitles them. I urge all contributors to GPLv2- and LGPLv2-licensed software distributed by Mac OS X to sue Apple for copyright infringement and seek monetary damages for *every single copy of Mac OS X* that included both the restrictive EULA and GPLv2- or LGPLv2- licensed software. It would be even better if Psystar could team up with the copyright holders to bring about a defensive counter-suit against Apple. There is nothing more despicable than Apple's hijacking of Free & Open Source software projects licensed under the GPLv2 or LGPLv2 and tying them to overpriced hardware through draconian EULAs. I'd love to see those thugs at Apple lose billions. But in order make this happen, I ask that you help spread the word to developers of all the affected FOSS projects. Please send emails to the development mailing lists of the GPLv2- or LGPLv2- licensed projects informing them that Apple is infringing on their copyright by defying Section 6 and Section 10 of the respective licenses. There is a list FOSS projects that supposedly make up part of Mac OS X at http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.5.3/, but I wouldn't trust Apple to be comprehensive. The GPLv2- and LGPLv2-licensed projects are listed under the license "Other". Thanks, and good luck standing up to the Apple thugs! -Erik Mac OS X 10.5.3 (Darwin 9.3) Source Code Downloads Project License .tar.gz Apple16X50Serial-19.2 APSL .tar.gz Apple3Com3C90x-10 APSL .tar.gz AppleADBButtons-300 APSL .tar.gz AppleADBKeyboard-239.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleADBMouse-212 APSL .tar.gz AppleAPIC-10 APSL .tar.gz AppleCore99NVRAM-111.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleDisplays-160.0.9 APSL .tar.gz AppleFan-110.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleFileSystemDriver-12 APSL .tar.gz AppleFlashNVRAM-105.4.0 APSL .tar.gz AppleGMACEthernet-157.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleGPIO-131.0.0 APSL .tar.gz AppleHWSensor-171.0.0 APSL .tar.gz AppleI2C-400.0.3 APSL .tar.gz AppleI2S-101.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleIntel8255x-18.0.80 APSL .tar.gz AppleIntelPIIXATA-200.0.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleK2SATA-104.3.2 APSL .tar.gz AppleK2SATARoot-105.2.2 APSL .tar.gz AppleKauaiATA-121.3.4 APSL .tar.gz AppleKeyLargo-172.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleKeyswitch-104.0.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleKiwiATA-102.3.2 APSL .tar.gz AppleKiwiRoot-105.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleMPIC-1.5.3 APSL .tar.gz AppleMacRISC2PE-187.0.5 APSL .tar.gz AppleMacRISC4PE-204.0.9 APSL .tar.gz AppleMacRiscPCI-3.4 APSL .tar.gz AppleMediaBay-102.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleOnboardAudio-257.3.2 APSL .tar.gz ApplePCCard16ATA-113 APSL .tar.gz ApplePCCardATA-103.3.2 APSL .tar.gz AppleRAID-3.0.19 APSL .tar.gz AppleRS232Serial-130.2.7 APSL .tar.gz AppleRTL8139Ethernet-141 APSL .tar.gz AppleSCCSerial-132.4.2 APSL .tar.gz AppleSMBIOS-28 APSL .tar.gz AppleSym8xx-122.3.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleTalk-91 APSL .tar.gz AppleThermal-101.3.2 APSL .tar.gz AppleUSBAudio-256.2.3 APSL .tar.gz AppleUSBCDCDriver-326.4.1 APSL .tar.gz AppleUSBIrDA-144.4.0 APSL .tar.gz AppleVIA-151.0.1 APSL .tar.gz BerkeleyDB-15 Other .tar.gz BootCache-43.1 APSL .tar.gz BootX-81 APSL .tar.gz CF-476.13 APSL .tar.gz CPAN-20 Other .tar.gz CPANInternal-32 Other .tar.gz ChatServer-263 Other .tar.gz Chess-105.0.14 Other .tar.gz CommonCrypto-32207 APSL .tar.gz CoreOSMakefiles-43 APSL .tar.gz CrackLib-30889 Other .tar.gz Csu-75 APSL .tar.gz CyrusIMAP-187.4 Other .tar.gz DSPasswordServerPlugin-208.4 APSL .tar.gz DSTools-112 APSL .tar.gz DirectoryService-514.19 APSL .tar.gz DiskArbitration-183 APSL .tar.gz DynamicPowerStep-1.6.0 APSL .tar.gz FastCGI-4 Other .tar.gz ICU-8.11.1 Other .tar.gz IOACPIFamily-5 APSL .tar.gz IOADBFamily-6 APSL .tar.gz IOATAFamily-173.3.1 APSL .tar.gz IOATAPIProtocolTransport-152.0.1 APSL .tar.gz IOAudioFamily-164.2.7 APSL .tar.gz IOBDStorageFamily-6 APSL .tar.gz IOCDStorageFamily-39 APSL .tar.gz IODVDStorageFamily-26 APSL .tar.gz IOFWDVComponents-195.4.0 APSL .tar.gz IOFireWireAVC-221.4.0 APSL .tar.gz IOFireWireFamily-344.4.0 APSL .tar.gz IOFireWireIP-171.4.0 APSL .tar.gz IOFireWireSBP2-198.4.0 APSL .tar.gz IOFireWireSerialBusProtocolTransport-151.0.4 APSL .tar.gz IOGraphics-233.3 APSL .tar.gz IOHIDFamily-258.1 APSL .tar.gz IOI2CFamily-111.0.2 APSL .tar.gz IOKitTools-76 APSL .tar.gz IOKitUser-388.2 APSL .tar.gz IONetworkingFamily-46 APSL .tar.gz IOPCCardFamily-48 APSL .tar.gz IOPCIFamily-103.1 APSL .tar.gz IOSCSIParallelFamily-151.1.1 APSL .tar.gz IOSerialFamily-31 APSL .tar.gz IOStorageFamily-89 APSL .tar.gz IOUSBFamily-315.4.1 APSL .tar.gz IOUSBMassStorageClass-201.0.2 APSL .tar.gz JavaScriptCore-5525.17 Other .tar.gz JavaScriptGlue-5525.13 APSL .tar.gz Kerberos-75.10.3 Other .tar.gz KerberosHelper-31.4 APSL .tar.gz KeyLargoATA-111.3.1 APSL .tar.gz Libc-498.1.1 APSL .tar.gz Libcpp_kext-5 Other .tar.gz Libinfo-278.0.3 APSL .tar.gz Libm-292.4 APSL .tar.gz Libnotify-35 APSL .tar.gz Librpcsvc-15 APSL .tar.gz Libstreams-25 APSL .tar.gz Libsystem-111.1.1 APSL .tar.gz Liby-15 Other .tar.gz MySQL-43 Other .tar.gz NFS-25 APSL .tar.gz OpenAL-29 Other .tar.gz OpenDirectory-39 APSL .tar.gz OpenLDAP-108.1 Other .tar.gz OpenSSH-95 Other .tar.gz OpenSSL-46 Other .tar.gz OpenSSL096-6.2 Other .tar.gz PowerManagement-143 APSL .tar.gz PyRSS2Gen-5 Other .tar.gz RubyCocoa-57.2 Other .tar.gz RubyGems-15.2 Other .tar.gz RubyOnRails-25.2 Other .tar.gz SCSIHeaderInstaller-100.0.2 APSL .tar.gz SQLite-46 Other .tar.gz Security-33532 APSL .tar.gz SecurityTokend-32363 APSL .tar.gz SecurityTool-32482 APSL .tar.gz SmartCardServices-32672 APSL .tar.gz SpamAssassin-137.1 Other .tar.gz SquirrelMail-24 Other .tar.gz SystemStubs-6 APSL .tar.gz TargetConfig-3 APSL .tar.gz TimeZoneData-10 Other .tar.gz Tokend-32432 APSL .tar.gz Twisted-5 Other .tar.gz UserNotification-21 APSL .tar.gz WebCore-5525.18.1 Other .tar.gz X11apps-14 Other .tar.gz X11fonts-5 Other .tar.gz X11libs-17.2 Other .tar.gz X11misc-6 Other .tar.gz X11proto-15 Other .tar.gz X11server-48.1 Other .tar.gz adv_cmds-119 APSL .tar.gz amavisd-110.2 Other .tar.gz apache-731 Other .tar.gz apache1-697 Other .tar.gz apache_mod_bonjour-9 Other .tar.gz apache_mod_fastcgi-3 Other .tar.gz apache_mod_hfs_apple-7 APSL .tar.gz apache_mod_perl-101 Other .tar.gz apache_mod_perl1-16 Other .tar.gz apache_mod_php-44 Other .tar.gz apache_mod_php4-32 Other .tar.gz apache_mod_ssl-690 Other .tar.gz apr-12 Other .tar.gz architecture-254 APSL .tar.gz at_cmds-54 APSL .tar.gz autoconf-14 Other .tar.gz autofs-109.1 APSL .tar.gz automake-7 Other .tar.gz awk-11 Other .tar.gz bash-76.2 Other .tar.gz basic_cmds-48 Other .tar.gz bc-21 Other .tar.gz bind9-24 Other .tar.gz bison-13 Other .tar.gz bison1-1 Other .tar.gz bless-63 APSL .tar.gz bootp-170.1 APSL .tar.gz bootstrap_cmds-60 APSL .tar.gz bsdmake-23 Other .tar.gz bsm-13 Other .tar.gz bzip2-16 Other .tar.gz cctools-667.3 APSL .tar.gz cddafs-230.0.5 APSL .tar.gz clamav-116.2 Other .tar.gz configd-212.2 APSL .tar.gz copyfile-42 APSL .tar.gz cron-30 Other .tar.gz crontabs-34 Other .tar.gz cscope-13 Other .tar.gz cups-136.9 Other .tar.gz curl-42 Other .tar.gz cvs-39 Other .tar.gz cvs_wrapped-13 Other .tar.gz cxxfilt-6 Other .tar.gz developer_cmds-49 Other .tar.gz diffstat-5 Other .tar.gz diskdev_cmds-421.1.11 APSL .tar.gz disklabel-2 APSL .tar.gz distcc-881 Other .tar.gz doc_cmds-47 Other .tar.gz dtrace-48 Other .tar.gz dyld-96.2 APSL .tar.gz eap8021x-49.4 APSL .tar.gz efax-28 Other .tar.gz emacs-70.1 Other .tar.gz enscript-11.1 Other .tar.gz expat-6 Other .tar.gz extenTools-17.3 APSL .tar.gz fetchmail-28 Other .tar.gz file-23 Other .tar.gz file_cmds-185.2 APSL .tar.gz files-530.1.3 APSL .tar.gz flex-20.3 Other .tar.gz freeradius-11 Other .tar.gz gcc-5465 Other .tar.gz gcc_42-5531 Other .tar.gz gcc_os-1823 Other .tar.gz gcc_select-66 APSL .tar.gz gccfast-1626 Other .tar.gz gdb-768 Other .tar.gz gdbforcw-5 Other .tar.gz glibtool-12 Other .tar.gz gm4-12 Other .tar.gz gnudiff-14 Other .tar.gz gnumake-119 Other .tar.gz gnuserv-7 Other .tar.gz gnutar-441 Other .tar.gz gnuzip-25 Other .tar.gz gperf-4 Other .tar.gz gpt-7 Other .tar.gz graphviz-622 Other .tar.gz grep-24 Other .tar.gz groff-31 Other .tar.gz gssd-23 Other .tar.gz gutenprint-5 Other .tar.gz headerdoc-8.6.16 APSL .tar.gz hfs-165 APSL .tar.gz iodbc-34 Other .tar.gz ipsec-34 Other .tar.gz ipv6configuration-27 APSL .tar.gz isoutil-34 APSL .tar.gz jam-851 Other .tar.gz kext_tools-117 APSL .tar.gz keymgr-18 Other .tar.gz ksh-13 Other .tar.gz launchd-258.12 APSL .tar.gz ld64-77.1 APSL .tar.gz less-20 Other .tar.gz libedit-11 Other .tar.gz libffi-10 Other .tar.gz libfs-7 APSL .tar.gz libgcc-8.1 Other .tar.gz libiconv-24 Other .tar.gz libmd-2 Other .tar.gz libpcap-18 Other .tar.gz libresolv-25 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_agent-32091.1 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_apple_csp-32567 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_apple_cspdl-32466 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_apple_file_dl-29159 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_apple_x509_cl-29856 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_apple_x509_tp-33583 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_asn1-29908 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_authorization-32564 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_cdsa_client-32432 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_cdsa_plugin-29159 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_cdsa_utilities-33506 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_cdsa_utils-32586 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_checkpw-29159 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_cms-32521 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_codesigning-33803 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_cssm-32993 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_dotmacdl-29745 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_filedb-32868 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_filevault-28631 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_keychain-33583 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_ldap_dl-30174 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_manifest-29384 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_mds-32820 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_ocspd-29518 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_pkcs12-32085 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_sd_cspdl-29159 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_smime-32850 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_ssl-32463 APSL .tar.gz libsecurity_utilities-32820 APSL .tar.gz libsecurityd-33470 APSL .tar.gz libstdcxx-16 Other .tar.gz libstdcxx_SUPanWheat-16 Other .tar.gz libtelnet-7 Other .tar.gz libutil-11 Other .tar.gz libxml2-17.7.6 Other .tar.gz libxslt-8.4.1 Other .tar.gz lsof-33 Other .tar.gz lukemftp-11 Other .tar.gz lukemftpd-33 Other .tar.gz mDNSResponder-171.4 APSL .tar.gz mail_cmds-22 Other .tar.gz mailman-126.1 Other .tar.gz man-12 Other .tar.gz misc_cmds-23 Other .tar.gz modemccl-20 APSL .tar.gz msdosfs-136.2 APSL .tar.gz nano-4 Other .tar.gz nasm-13 Other .tar.gz ncurses-21 Other .tar.gz neon-8 Other .tar.gz net_snmp-112 Other .tar.gz netcat-7 Other .tar.gz netinfo-382 APSL .tar.gz network_cmds-307 APSL .tar.gz notify-15 APSL .tar.gz ntfs-52 Other .tar.gz ntp-37 Other .tar.gz objc4-371.1 APSL .tar.gz openmpi-5 Other .tar.gz pam-32.1 Other .tar.gz pam_modules-36.1 Other .tar.gz passwordserver_sasl-118 Other .tar.gz patch_cmds-11 Other .tar.gz pb_makefiles-128 APSL .tar.gz pbx_jamfiles-874 APSL .tar.gz pdisk-6 Other .tar.gz perl-51.1.2 Other .tar.gz portmap-26 Other .tar.gz postfix-174.1 Other .tar.gz ppp-314 APSL .tar.gz procmail-11 Other .tar.gz project_makefiles-126 APSL .tar.gz pyOpenSSL-2 Other .tar.gz pyobjc-14.1.1 Other .tar.gz python-30.1.2 Other .tar.gz python23-17.1.1 Other .tar.gz python_dateutil-2 Other .tar.gz python_modules-12 Other .tar.gz rcs-13 Other .tar.gz remote_cmds-13 Other .tar.gz removefile-11 APSL .tar.gz rsync-31 Other .tar.gz ruby-67.2 Other .tar.gz ruby_dnssd-6 Other .tar.gz ruby_libxml-6 Other .tar.gz samba-187.5 Other .tar.gz screen-12 Other .tar.gz security_authtrampoline-32534 APSL .tar.gz security_certificates-32854 Other .tar.gz security_certtool-31828 APSL .tar.gz security_crlrefresh-31832 APSL .tar.gz security_dotmac_tp-33607 APSL .tar.gz security_ocspd-32148 APSL .tar.gz security_privportserver-26778 APSL .tar.gz security_systemkeychain-33578 APSL .tar.gz securityd-33639 APSL .tar.gz shell_cmds-118 Other .tar.gz smb-348.3 Other .tar.gz srm-6 Other .tar.gz stmalloc-4 APSL .tar.gz subversion-16 Other .tar.gz sudo-28 Other .tar.gz svk-9 Other .tar.gz swig-4 Other .tar.gz syslog-64 APSL .tar.gz system_cmds-433.1 APSL .tar.gz system_config-49 APSL .tar.gz tcl-64 Other .tar.gz tcp_wrappers-18 Other .tar.gz tcpdump-23 Other .tar.gz tcsh-60 Other .tar.gz texi2html-5 Other .tar.gz texinfo-17 Other .tar.gz text_cmds-69 APSL .tar.gz tidy-14 Other .tar.gz top-38 APSL .tar.gz usertemplate-66 APSL .tar.gz uucp-10 Other .tar.gz vim-34 Other .tar.gz webdavfs-252.6 APSL .tar.gz wxWidgets-11 Other .tar.gz xar-28 Other .tar.gz xelf-1 Other .tar.gz xnu-1228.5.18 APSL .tar.gz zip-9 Other .tar.gz zlib-18 Other .tar.gz zsh-48 Other .tar.gz From twaffle at gmail.com Sat Aug 30 06:19:45 2008 From: twaffle at gmail.com (Thomas Charron) Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 00:19:45 -0400 Subject: Apple is violating the GPL with its Mac OS X EULA and lawsuit against Psystar In-Reply-To: <107636.1230.qm@web45314.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <107636.1230.qm@web45314.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <30dfe2a80808292119k18a3a6c8gd53b7e9d3f48d7b3@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Erik Warner wrote: > Hi, > Apple filed a suit against computer maker Psystar for selling computers preloaded with legally-purchased copies of Mac OS X. Apple is basing the suit on Mac OS X's restrictive EULA, which attempts to prohibit installing Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. The problem for Apple is that Mac OS X includes software licensed under the GPLv2 and LGPLv2, both of which expressly prohibit placing additional restrictions on software covered by the GPLv2 and LGPLv2. Apple's attempt to place a restrictive EULA on software they do *NOT* own copyright to, software whose licenses (GPLv2 and LGPLv2) expressly prohibit placing additional restrictions on downstream recipients, constitutes a massive violation of the GPLv2 and LGPLv2. You are insinuating that the GPL has 'infected' OSX. This is quite obviously not the case. They didn't place any restrictions on the GPL components. They aren't suing anyone for that at all. What they ARE going after is a company selling quite obviously cheap hardware using Apples stuff. Apple has given back to the community or projects. They choose not to open THEIR stuff. That is their right. Don't like it? Don't use it. If you are stating that all of these GPL applications are actually, in fact, part of the operating system, I'm sure Microsoft would LOVE to hear this obviously overlooked fact so they can once again call internet explorer, 'part of the operating system'. -- -- Thomas