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.
Thread beginning with comment 391685
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Is this really noncompliance?
by boldingd on Wed 28th Oct 2009 23:30 UTC in reply to "Is this really noncompliance?"
boldingd
Member since:
2009-02-19

At least for the GPL, as far as I know, and with various other disclaimers, you're not only required to make source available when requested, but you're also required to preserve the license notification, and present it when the program is run. If Psystar is using GPL'ed code and not reproducing the GPL license at some stage, they're in violation already, even if they haven't denied a code-request yet. Now, the APL may be different, that I don't know.

Reply Parent Score: 2