Logitech acquired SightSpeed - possible GPL violation ?

[Thomas Charron]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:36 AM, cuseeme <codewarrior at cuseeme.de> wrote:
> dear eperts,
>
> regarding to an article that i read in the news yesterday
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/29/AR2008102900907.html>
>
> I would like to know,  if an former GNU project is done with significant use
> of opensource resources

  Your question makes absolutely no sense at all.  'is done'?  Do you
mean you'd like to know if the CU30 project was written under Linux
using gcc and many other open source tools?

>>  CU30-L couldn't have been written without the work done by the GNU
>> Project.
>>  While CU30-L used lots  of tools developed by GNU, it relies heavily on
>> the
>>  Linux kernel for several of  its interfaces.
> how much new code must have been wrapped around the "original " code to
> avoid a GPL violation  ?
> Someone told me about 20 % ?

  ....  Your quote is totally out of context.  You're inferring they
are wrapping something.  There is nothing being wrapped here.  They
are using a GPLed OS, compiling and debugging with GCC, and utilizing
other open open source applications and utilities.  Within this
environment, they are then writing a proprietary application.

>>  Update! - In 2002, the members of the CU30 project formed a company
>> called SightSpeed for
>>  commercialization of the technology.
>>  Remember to keep in mind that this method is patented. The two US patents
>> that cover this are
>>  5,973,626 and 5,740,278.
> if a project insist  on such a lot of GNU code , how can it be violate any
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent>  ?
> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/boom/2001sp/rosenberg/
> thanks for any enlightening

  The GPL v2 had issues with patents.  v3 resolved these issues.  In
my opinion, patents are 'playing dirty' if implemented using GPL
software.

  However, this is not a point.  There isn't any GPL software embedded
in the software.  There IS an LGPL library being linked in, and they
are conforming to the license in that regard.

  Considering your email address infers you are possibly a competitor,
I would HIGHLY recommend that you do a little more research before
posting a message like this on a public GPL list.

-- 
-- Thomas