http://slashdot.org/articles/03/02/07/2225224.shtml?tid=117&tid=106
Castle Technology Ltd Ore Trading Estate Woodbridge Road Framlingham Suffolk IP13 9LL UK
Sales Telephone Line: 01728 723 200 Lines Open: Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00
-
Ok this company seems to have stolen some of the linux kernel code and distributed it without giving the code away, this is a violation of the GPL. I think that this is all very wrong and will be writing a letter to them in complaint and asking for the source code(lol i bet i get a link to www.kernel.org sent back)!
"This code is linked with other proprietary code." - dose that not mean that the proprietary code should also become GPL?
What do you think will be done? What should be done?
Dennis Dryden
NuTTeR -- Not Entered -- wrote:
"This code is linked with other proprietary code." - dose that not mean that the proprietary code should also become GPL?
It depends on if the original code is GPL or LGPL and how it is "linked". It may be difficult to work out the legality of the GPL in this respect to force someone to open other code, especially if it was licensed from another source they may not actually own what is "linked" with it.
What do you think will be done? What should be done?
First off we should be 100% sure that there is a problem, 1,000,000 revolutionary penguinistas descending from the hills intent on blood could look very embarrassing when you find out that there has been a mistake. (although the likelyhood of a mistake appears to be small)
People should organise a boycott of their products is the best start, hitting what appears to be a fairly small company in the wallet will hurt them quite quickly (maybe we should make make local risc os user groups aware of this) so disuading any customers would be a good start.
(or we leave Tux heads in their beds etc.) ;)
Then they can either
A. be encouraged to GPL *all* of the code in question.
or
B. be encouraged to remove all disputed code and rewrite using BSD style/licensed sources.
Adam
NuTTeR -- Not Entered -- uknutter@graffiti.net wrote:
Ok this company seems to have stolen some of the linux kernel code and distributed it without giving the code away, this is a violation of the GPL. I think that this is all very wrong and will be writing a letter to them in complaint and asking for the source code(lol i bet i get a link to www.kernel.org sent back)!
Unless you have a copy of the binary, then you have no right to ask for the source code. Unless you are the copyright holder of the code they have broken the licence of, you have no right to stop them. I suggest you try contacting them and asking politely whether the rumour you have heard is true and whether they have a reply to the terrible publicity. It will be for others to take them to court if necessary.
"This code is linked with other proprietary code." - dose that not mean that the proprietary code should also become GPL?
If it is linking (ie the API is embedded into their code) and they distribute the results, then it is a derived work and yes.
What do you think will be done? What should be done?
Someone should LART whoever posted that to slashdot. Attack of the flameboys is not the way to resolve this.
I've no idea what will happen.
-
Adam Bower -
MJ Ray -
NuTTeR -- Not Entered --