Because it works better if people actually care about the violation of the law and show it, more is likely to get done.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jerry Weinger Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 12:32 PM To: Braillenote List Subject: Re: [Braillenote] PulseData In Violation Of The GNU LesserGeneralPublic License, Other Comments About Opening Source/Specs Sabahattin, What does this mean to me, a Braillenote user. y are you approaching the list, rather than engaging a lawyer with what you claim to be a violation of the law? Sincerely, Jerry Weinger ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sabahattin Gucukoglu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 5:55 AM Subject: [Braillenote] PulseData In Violation Of The GNU Lesser GeneralPublic License, Other Comments About Opening Source/Specs -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, I sent a message using PulseData's fault return form stating my belief that PulseData International, with regard to XBase database technology used in the latest version of KeySoft, is in violation of the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License - that is, the open source and freedom of use license under which this software library is furnished - and that by doing so it is violating the copyrights of the authors of this library. The notice got flung back and forth between New Zealand and the UK, where I reside, and subsequently got forgotten. My concern was never addressed, and the problem, by following my advice, was never resolved. I have no wish to begin active war with PulseData, and I hope by writing this email I am giving you another opportunity to understand and correct this problem. It is my very strong feeling, as an open source advocate, that this very serious legal concern be dealt with as soon as possible. I make no guarantee of nondisclosure of any kind, however; the author of this library is the only party which can enforce copyright limitation and I certainly have no desire to let my custom with PulseData in any way restrict the author's personal assessment of the situation, should it be necessary. The GNU Lesser General Public License is a set of terms provided by the author of a software package - usually a package of pre-written routines for performing some specific and usually specialised task, termed a library - under copyright. The software is copyrighted, but the terms allow the software's use in a fully open source fashion - that is, the license gives those who accept it the right to copy, distribute, modify, get and examine the source code of, make a fee for and derive work upon the software, just to mention a few, as long as he follows a few simple rules of courtesy that ensure full freedom of the software, in the sense of free speech and not free beer, for everyone. The full text of the GNU Lesser General Public License, termed the "LGPL" for short, is available at these locations: HTML - http://www.fsf.org/licenses/lgpl.html Plain text - http://www.fsf.org/licenses/lgpl.txt The free Software Foundation is the author of the LGPL, which is in turn the brother to the more strict GPL (The GNU General Public License), a full freedom-of-use declaration license, in which all code in any way derived from or using GPL code must also be GPL - that is, free software. For more information about the Free Software Foundation and its aims, and to understand the GNU licenses and the various ways in which they work, visit http://www.fsf.org/ . The LGPL is typically used to allow free software like a library, as when freedom is defined by the Free Software Foundation, to link with non-free, proprietary software. This is usually to the benefit of the library authors - for instance, if a free software library equivalent to a widespread, non-free library in common use is to gain the greatest possible audience, then it is useful to make the software available under terms that would not hinder use of that library in commercial applications and where there is little to gain by doing otherwise. There are other cases where encouragement of free software can only be achieved by making the software available under the LGPL, as when free software is expecting to set a free de facto standard for global usage. Ogg Vorbis is a fine example of this. The BrailleNote is using the LGPLed XBase Database Technology developed by G. A. Kunkel and StarTech. The author has released the software under copyright and under the terms of the LGPL. PulseData, in my belief, must take these two steps to fully comply with the GNU Lesser General Public License and hence with copyright law: 1. Include a copy of the LGPL in the documentation of the BrailleNote, or make it available on the same medium on which the library is to be found. In the case that the library is compiled, as in our case, the LGPL must accompany the binary library object files - so, it is installed on each BrailleNote unit, and must be referenced from a conspicuous location. 2. A link to or a copy of the source code, plus any dated and described modifications made by PulseData, must be provided in the copyright statement and information on the BrailleNote. This can be in KeySoft's documentation, in the BrailleNote's acknowledgement listing, or - preferably - both. Since the user must be able to compile any modified version of the library he chooses and must be able to execute the modified version, as provisioned by the LGPL, and since you are expected to make your contributions to this library available under the same terms, PulseData must supply its users and the library authors with all of the information, including - if required - any object code, source code, interface information and scripts necessary for the user to do this. Please review the LGPL, as linked above, for complete details. The following are just observations and have nothing to do with the case described above, though these comments are related to what I have just described. There is a certain sharp irony in PulseData's choosing to use and positively inovate and sell their BrailleNote products with free software (as in the case of XBase in the Planner) or open source software (including Project Mayo, used in KeySoft's MP3 player, whose license cannot be exactly determined and in which PulseData's rights cannot therefore be reliably contested), given the currently very closed and proprietary nature of the BrailleNote. Everyone knows that the market holds nothing for a device if it cannot be surrounded by a community of imaginative, willing and bright developers from the four corners of the earth who will extend, expand and improve on its capabilities from the word "go". Perhaps PulseData has been drinking the last dregs of its days of pride gone by, and hasn't realised that they are rapidly coming to an end - as we know, so do all good things. I would personally encourage PulseData to start right now with their opening up, particularly with their apparent (and hopefully legitimate and unselfish) interest in existing open source software, in the form of SDKs at the absolute minimum, and to begin very soon. However much they do so, it has got to be better than the current situation. Your competitors don't have to do an awful lot to be open - the community will accept Windows as being closed, but the same is not true for KeySoft; any application can run on Windows CE and so your competitor's device, the same is not - and never will be - true of KeySoft. Your immediate competitor has pulled all the stops out to make openness a priority - hardware specs, developer resources, compilers ... all because the machine is standard and even cross-platform - your move to open up could be the best one you, PulseData, make in the blindness PDA industry, because BrailleNote is the only PDA which can reasonably be said to be a fierce competitor, one of the leaders, in that market - and what's more, at the same time, the only one which is explicitly and exclusively designed for the visually impaired. I like the BrailleNote for its convenience, for its ease-of-use and its uncluttered and incredibly clean and intuitive nature. But, and this is a fact, it's more closed than a default installation of OpenBSD (a version of Berkeley Software Distribution - a UNIX - intended for security-conscious administrators - http://www.openbsd.org/ ). Your only resolve to get even in any way with your competitor is to let us do the work for you and develop that game of Minesweeper they've all been asking for, or the filtering support in the email program, or the ZCode interpreter... If I were in their boots right now, I'd do what should have been done a long time ago and cut the losses being made in shoals to competitors at this moment and GPL (or other OSI approved license - http://www.opensource.org/ ) the whole darn lot, charging only for licensed technology such as the Lernout TTS (original Berkeley TTS). Equally, open up the hardware specifications so that other operating systems may run on the device - that way, open source can take its natural path and we suddenly get, for instance, a Linux or BSD port of KeySoft, which runs with ten times the reliability of Windows CE version 2 and twenty times faster on the same old board, or Speakup - the popular screen reader for Linux - running with the Keynote Synthesiser. The horizons are truely boundless. Seriously though, at this rate, I think it likely that a price drop due to the open sourcing of all that can be open sourced and open spec'ing of all that can be open spec'ed would be of great value to the developers, like myself, among us, and certainly to your future customers, who have now got a better bargain and a real selling point - the use of truely open source software and the promise of future, out-of- house-developed applications by the community - to buy for. Like I said, it makes for a plausible market position for the BrailleNote on this newest of battlefields, and we all benefit. I ask PulseData to think about it, and just for once stop long enough to realise how much you will get in return for divulging those secrets of twenty years ago, as you will for continuing this profuse battle against the modern IT era and technology, not to mention any legal complications with future open source deployment you may incur through sore attempts at profit-making. Whatever extent you choose to go with your opening up, if PulseData want to use open source software, I say go for it - just remember that someone somewhere wrote it, probably in their spare time and out of the goodness of their hearts; exploiting it, concealing it for what it is when explicitly told not to do so or finding ways to obfuscate the value of open source software while reaping its abilities and inovations will not be tolerated - not by me, not by the open source community, not by many of the authors of open - or at least, free - software. PulseData could really win with a startling move to open up, soon. So, get on with it! If absolutely anyone - and in particular PulseData - have any questions about all that I've said, I welcome you to ask them. I am anxious to let you here the very full story. Cheers, Sabahattin - -- Thought for the day: Bagpipes (n): an octopus wearing a kilt. Latest PGP Public key blocks? Send any mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sabahattin Gucukoglu Phone: +44 (0)20 7,502-1615 Mobile: +44 (0)7986 053399 http://www.sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/ Email/MSN: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0 -- QDPGP 2.70 iQA/AwUBQJTFgCNEOmEWtR2TEQI+JgCghlGhOfadcUEJLfhGrEiq72LGe4AAmgLe d1LWFcrMqNRjzePanwBCkeig =MIkZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ___ To leave the BrailleNote list, send a blank message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To view the list archives or change your preferences, visit http://list.pulsedata.com/mailman/listinfo/braillenote ___ To leave the BrailleNote list, send a blank message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To view the list archives or change your preferences, visit http://list.pulsedata.com/mailman/listinfo/braillenote
