Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Oct 2009 14:09 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Hardware, Embedded Systems When Psystar announced it Rebel EFI package, the company was quickly accused of simply taking open source code, repackaging it, and selling it for USD 50. While selling open source code is not a problem, not making the source code available if the license demands it is. Netkas, famous OSX86 hacker, and a Russian site are now claiming they have found the smoking gun.
Permalink for comment 391613
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Is this really noncompliance?
by sbergman27 on Wed 28th Oct 2009 17:04 UTC
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

I don't pay a huge amount of attention to Psystar. I generally approve of what they do. But I have no great interest in running MacOSX myself.

But... Psystar announced this product 6 days ago. Right? Has anyone actually requested the source and been refused? If the source was requested 6 days ago and hasn't been provided yet, it that noncompliance? If I request the source right now and get it an hour later... would that be 1 hour of noncompliace? Requiring formal "forgiveness" be given by the original copyright holder and all that crap before things are put back to rights?

Or have some OSNews readers decided to grab their pitchforks and storm the castle prematurely... yet again? It's not like the issue of delayed source code availability doesn't arise at least weekly, accompanied by much frothing at the mouth by certain OSNews readers.

I'm going to watch and wait a bit before screaming out my opinion on the matter.

Edited 2009-10-28 17:09 UTC

Reply Score: 6