[LAD] Possible gpl validation
Hi all For some time now there is a website witch offer a USB stick, a slackware based Audio bundle full with GPL'd software. I have some discussions with the provider, because he wouldn't make the source available to his (possible) users, and he wouldn't make them aware that they have the right to receive the source. I have contacted license-violat...@gpl-violations.org and get a fast response first. On my question if they see a GPL validation they wrote after visit the site : Looks like it. On the website he/she claims that everything is under GPL. I would suggest contacting the person in question, gently pointing out to his/her obligations. If you have already done so, let us know and we'll try again. Well, I let them know that I've try it without success. Unfortunately I didn't hear any more from them for more the 2 weaks. Is anyone here on the list knowing what is to do now, what could we do to make the provider aware that he must offer the source in the same way then the binary's, and that he must make clear that users have the right to receive the source. I guess most of the Copyright-holders from the used applications are members of this list. At least, I still believe that no one how buy this stick, ever have a interest in the source, so it is just a mater of respect for the GPL, but, it's a shame for me to see the GPL validate in such a way and get on top of that a response from the provider in a Fuck off attitude. To bad that I need to provide the link to this crap here, so that you could have a look at it: http://www.getstudio1337.com/ here is the discussion about the issue: http://www.linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.php?f=4t=7928 any Ideas what to do ? Or I'm completely wrong in my understand of the GPL? greets hermann ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:41 AM, hermann brumm...@web.de wrote: Is anyone here on the list knowing what is to do now, what could we do to make the provider aware that he must offer the source in the same way then the binary's, this part is not quite true. its generally accepted that as long as the source is freel available from an identifiable online location, then notifying people who received the binaries of their rights and the location from which the source can be obtained is sufficient *if there are no modifications* ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 16:41 +0200, hermann wrote: At least, I still believe that no one how buy this stick, ever have a interest in the source I disagree. IMO it's ok if a small distro doesn't provide the source, if they instead make clear, that the distro is open source and if they also don't take money. IIRC Mepis some years ago had issues, because the sources were not provided, but IMO it was ok. This USB stick product IMO is a rip off, if they don't make clear that everybody has the right to get the source codes. 2 Cents, Ralf PS: REAPER? ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 11:07 -0400 schrieb Paul Davis: On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:41 AM, hermann brumm...@web.de wrote: Is anyone here on the list knowing what is to do now, what could we do to make the provider aware that he must offer the source in the same way then the binary's, this part is not quite true. its generally accepted that as long as the source is freel available from an identifiable online location, then notifying people who received the binaries of their rights and the location from which the source can be obtained is sufficient *if there are no modifications* But he fail already by notify people of there rights. How could one say if there are modifications ? Anyhow, for sure there is GPL'd software included, witch is modified, and isn't available at a online location. He claim it as a modified slackware OS build. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
On 29.04.2012 16:41, hermann wrote: For some time now there is a website witch offer a USB stick, a slackware based Audio bundle full with GPL'd software. I have some discussions with the provider, because he wouldn't make the source available to his (possible) users, and he wouldn't make them aware that they have the right to receive the source. I am irritated by the (possible). Did you or someone else get the binaries from him and then tried to get the source code or did you try to get the source code first? Cheers, Andreas ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 17:11 +0200 schrieb Ralf Mardorf: On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 16:41 +0200, hermann wrote: At least, I still believe that no one how buy this stick, ever have a interest in the source I disagree. IMO it's ok if a small distro doesn't provide the source, if they instead make clear, that the distro is open source and if they also don't take money. IIRC Mepis some years ago had issues, because the sources were not provided, but IMO it was ok. This USB stick product IMO is a rip off, if they don't make clear that everybody has the right to get the source codes. 2 Cents, Ralf PS: REAPER? I guess you misunderstood me, I mean, that, if you buy this stick, then you will properly never ask for the source, then you will be a plain musician without any interest in software source. Otherwise, you will direct go to the source ad build your own stick, following the instructions from this links: http://slackermedia.info/html/ http://www.studioware.org/ ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 17:51 +0200 schrieb Andreas Kuckartz: On 29.04.2012 16:41, hermann wrote: For some time now there is a website witch offer a USB stick, a slackware based Audio bundle full with GPL'd software. I have some discussions with the provider, because he wouldn't make the source available to his (possible) users, and he wouldn't make them aware that they have the right to receive the source. I am irritated by the (possible). Did you or someone else get the binaries from him and then tried to get the source code or did you try to get the source code first? Cheers, Andreas I'm not a lawyer, nor an expert of GPL. I have a understand of GPL, witch I see validated here, but I cant say for sure that it is the fact. No, I wouldn't buy those crap, and I didn't know anyone how buy it. But in a discussion with the provider, he said that he wouldn't provide the source, also not for regular users if they request it. This is the second time this guy distribute sticks wich binary s and he claim that he didn't need to provide the source. That is, what he understand under the GPL. greets hermann ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
2012/4/29 hermann brumm...@web.de: This is the second time this guy distribute sticks wich binary s and he claim that he didn't need to provide the source. That is, what he understand under the GPL. As I understood the GPL, he/she doesn't have to offer the source code to non-customers. ( GPL can be used commercially. ) But in the FAQ they say : If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code, the GPL says you must _ provide a written offer _ to distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html -- E.R. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 18:33 +0200 schrieb Emanuel Rumpf: 2012/4/29 hermann brumm...@web.de: This is the second time this guy distribute sticks wich binary s and he claim that he didn't need to provide the source. That is, what he understand under the GPL. As I understood the GPL, he/she doesn't have to offer the source code to non-customers. ( GPL can be used commercially. ) But in the FAQ they say : If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code, the GPL says you must _ provide a written offer _ to distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html yes, that is how I understand it also, but he explizit say that he wouldn't do that. He only distribute binarys, no source available, for no-one ever. No _ provide a written offer _ ever :-(|) Not for the included Applications, nor for the OS itself. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
On 04/29/2012 04:41 PM, hermann wrote: any Ideas what to do ? Hello Hermann, Just ignore this whole Studio 1337 thing, trying to conversate normally with the guy behind it will only stress you out. Best, Jeremy ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 11:07 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:41 AM, hermann brumm...@web.de wrote: Is anyone here on the list knowing what is to do now, what could we do to make the provider aware that he must offer the source in the same way then the binary's, this part is not quite true. its generally accepted that as long as the source is freel available from an identifiable online location, then notifying people who received the binaries of their rights and the location from which the source can be obtained is sufficient *if there are no modifications* I agree with Paul. He's got all of the included package's web site links on his web site. If you want to duplicate what he's done you can just jump to all of those links, get all the source code, and build it yourself. Thirty bucks doesn't sound like too high a price to avoid the headaches though (assuming it works ;-) Jan ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Possible gpl validation
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 15:44 -0500 schrieb Jan Depner: On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 11:07 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:41 AM, hermann brumm...@web.de wrote: Is anyone here on the list knowing what is to do now, what could we do to make the provider aware that he must offer the source in the same way then the binary's, this part is not quite true. its generally accepted that as long as the source is freel available from an identifiable online location, then notifying people who received the binaries of their rights and the location from which the source can be obtained is sufficient *if there are no modifications* I agree with Paul. He's got all of the included package's web site links on his web site. If you want to duplicate what he's done you can just jump to all of those links, get all the source code, and build it yourself. Thirty bucks doesn't sound like too high a price to avoid the headaches though (assuming it works ;-) Jan The link list is far away from all. eg.: libs, kernel, etc. The price is not in question. But I think, if one use GPL'd software commercial, the distributor must make sure that the source is available to the users, I mean the complete source here. This stick is a bit more then a bundle of applications were a link to some project site will suite the requirements of the GPL. hermann ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
