Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 8th Jun 2007 21:45 UTC
Window Managers The second release candidate for Ion3 has been released. "This is the second 'rc' release, and contains primarily bug fixes and other minor improvements." Get it from the download page.
Thread beginning with comment 246521
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

"I would contend that there is no trademark violation, as permission for minor modifications to the source of Ion3 is implied by distributing the source."

I thought it was understood that if you modify someone's GPL'ed source, you either a) submit it back to the original author for acceptance b) fork the code or c) keep it for private/internal use. In this respect, Tuomo's anger seems justified. It's a pity that he feels he needs to lash out when the solution is simple. Politely ask your offender to rename their project. I would also think he has a case for GPL violation, but as I said earlier, I thought respect was understood.

Respect the author, respect the code.
Full disclosure: I'm a fan of Ion3.

Reply Parent Score: 3

bugnotme Member since:

Apparently you do not understand software freedom in general or the GPL in particular. Freedom means not having to ask the author's permission.

Reply Parent Score: 1

n1xt3r Member since:

That's funny. No offense, but it seems that _you_ are the one who doesn't understand "software freedom" or the GPL. Some of the "freedoms" in the GPL require certain responsibilities from those modifying the code (emphasis is mine):

"Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations."

The author of the hacked version of Ion3 was clearly acting irresponsibly by failing to distinguish his version from the original. This would also seem to qualify as a violation of the GPL, but I'm not a lawyer.

Reply Parent Score: 1