> Huh? This sentence no verb. You seem to be suggesting again that this
> clickwrap imposes restrictions on your exercising of your recipients'
> rights as granted under the GPL.
It forces me to agree to terms which were not included in the
original method for obtaining sources for POSE, assuming I am allowed access
to those sources behind the clickwrap, but I would never find out if that
were true, unless I clicked through it. Sort of a chicken-and-egg.
Palm has the same thing with regard to obtaining their SDK. It's why
a lot of OSS authors refuse to use the Palm SDK, unfortnnuately.
> Oh? Please point to these statements. Which clickwrap are we talking
> about?
I just poked around a bit, and noticed that Sony changed their
pages, and the verbage associated with these download. Apparently the
pressure from last year caused them to change their stance, but only
slightly. When I get my laptop back up online I'll go through my old mail
archives and grab the original wording that was on their pages, as filed
with the FSF. In short, they claimed that by downloading the CLIE POSE
sources, which were copyright Sony, you were not allowed to redistribute
them.
> If you're going to aim these smaller arrows at someone, you need to make
> sure that they'll stick or else you'll be the one who ends up looking
> like an idiot.
My only beef is that they are in violation for not providing sources
to binaries to versions which they make available NOW, nothing more. I am
not trying to take Sony down for this (if I wanted to aim arrows, it'd be at
their media group for backing the RIAA, DMCA, DRm, and other ridiculous
motives, not this smaller issue).
> Let's step back for a minute and remember why we want to play with the
> source code. It's not because we're license nazis, although being
> pedantic computer programmers there's probably a bit of that.
It's funny that in the proprietary world, license violations are
taken seriously, but when it comes to OSS, that same "corporate community"
just likes to completely ignore licensing altogether.
"Oh we downloaded this thing from the internet, and it saved us
months in development time and costs, but it had this silly GPL
thing in it. We don't use that GPL stuff in our products, so we
just removed it all from the code.."
I only become a "license nazi" when it involves theft of code.
> Sony does not have a burning desire to be able to emulate Cli�s on Unix
> or Macs.
Having a working Clie emulator on these platorms increases the tools
available to developers who can author applications which use this platform
(the Clie) and then people go and buy these devices.. Perhaps for a company
as narrow-minded as Sony (evidenced in this area, the PS2 development area,
and their media constriction habits) I am not surprised this simple
economics escapes them.
> Sony's time is saved, and Poser gets better. Everybody wins!
Sony can go take a hike, I'm only concerned with improving the
existing tools, and ensuring that companies that use and support them
understand the licensing they are bound by when using them.
/d
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
