Open Source Archive

Interview: Jon ‘maddog’ Hall

Submitted by anonymous 2006-11-02 Open Source 6 Comments

Jon Hall, president of Linux International, is a passionate spokesman for the open source community and ideal. In this two-part interview, he speaks at length on the progress and challenges for open source, and on the need to recapture a purer vision of education.

GPLv3: What the Hackers Said

Submitted by poohgee 2006-10-24 Open Source 31 Comments

"When I wrote about the wrangling over the GNU GPLv3 licence a month back, it provoked a lively conversation in the comments. Given this evident passion among readers, I thought it would be interesting to ask the top hackers - the ones actually involved in the discussions - for their thoughts on the matter. So I contacted Richard Stallman for the FSF angle, and a bunch of the top kernel hackers - Linus, Alan Cox, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Andrew Morton and Dave Miller - for their view."

What Do Dependencies Have to Do with Free Software?

Submitted by michuk 2006-10-15 Open Source 42 Comments

"There is one huge difference between the free and non-free software that has some very practical implications in the way we use it. One of those implications are the dependencies between single software packages in the free software model. What do they have to do with the free software philosophy and why should not you be afraid of them? Read on to find this out."

GPL v3: Who’s Driving That Bus?

Submitted by Moulinneuf 2006-10-14 Open Source 74 Comments

The article goes on to paint a doomsday scenario about how there will be an older version and a newer version of Linux floating around, and how such a division will split and ultimately weaken the Linux operating system.

The EUPL: a License Worth Considering?

Submitted by Luis 2006-10-13 Open Source 49 Comments

"There has been lots of talk over the past few years about open source license proliferation. I'm generally of the mind that if you can't solve the problem with the GPL, MPL, or BSD, it's not a licensing problem worth solving. I've therefore been interested to watch the progress of the European Union Public License (Draft here). The EU has stated its rationale (which the Free Software Foundation doesn't buy), but let me add one big reason of my own."

European Commission Boosts Open Source

Submitted by elsewhere 2006-10-12 Open Source 7 Comments

"The European Commission has taken steps to promote the use of open source systems and software in the public sector. It has selected a consortium led by Unisys Belgium to create and manage the Open Source Observatory and Repository, the company announced. Other members of the consortium are the Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology, consultancy GOPA Cartermill, and the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos of Madrid. They will provide an internet service and portal enabling European administrations to centrally store and share the software code of their open source applications and exchange open source knowledge."

GPL – Kororaa Issues Final Statement

Submitted by Matt 2006-10-03 Open Source 48 Comments

The Kororaa project just issued a final statement about the GPL issue which arose earlier this year. "At this stage I have decided to take the opinion that non-GPL modules are violations of the Linux kernel and are also unethical. This means we will not build non-GPL drivers against the kernel and as such Kororaa will not be shipping non-GPL modules in any future products. Of course if the end user believes non-GPL drivers are acceptable, then he/she is free to install them on their own system. For myself however, I am using the Linux kernel to create a product. If it was not for Linux then it would not exist and I therefore have a responsibility to respect the license of the kernel."

Torvalds ‘Fed up’ with the FSF

Submitted by Moulinneuf 2006-09-28 Open Source 106 Comments

Friday Several kernel developers issued a position paper criticizing the GPLv3 drafts. That prompted Software Freedom Law Center chairman Eben Moglen to issue a 'renewed invitation' yesterday to kernel developers to participate in the GPLv3 process. Linus Torvalds responded to Moglen's statement by saying that his position on the license is clear and that he's "fed up" with the FSF.

FSF Clarifies the Second Discussion Draft of GPLv3

Submitted by anonymous 2006-09-26 Open Source 26 Comments

"The Free Software Foundation wishes to clarify a few factual points about the Second Discussion Draft of GNU GPL version 3, on which recent discussion has presented inaccurate information. The FSF has no power to force anyone to switch from GPLv2 to GPLv3 on their own code. We intentionally wrote GPLv2 (and GPLv1) so we would not have this power. Software developers will continue to have the right to use GPLv2 for their code after GPLv3 is published, and we will respect their decisions."

GPLViolations.org Wins Case Against D-Link

Submitted by Ben Jao Ming 2006-09-23 Open Source 75 Comments

"The gpl-violations.org project prevails in court litigation against D-Link regarding D-Link's alleged inappropriate and copyright infringing use of parts of the Linux Operating System Kernel. D-Link distributed DSM-G600, a network attached storage device which uses a Linux-based Operating System. However, this distribution was incompliant with the GNU General Public License which covers the Linux Kernel and many other software programs used in the product."

Linux Kernel Developers’ Position on GPLv3

Submitted by diegocg 2006-09-22 Open Source 53 Comments

A group of 29 Linux kernel developers have recently come together and produced a position statement on GPLv3 explaining why they don't like the GPLv3. "The three key objections noted in section 5 are individually and collectively sufficient reason for us to reject the current licence proposal. We foresee the release of GPLv3 portends the Balkanisation of the entire Open Source Universe upon which we rely." They've also run a GPLv3 poll.

Why the GPL Rocketed Linux to Success

Submitted by porcel 2006-09-20 Open Source 43 Comments

David Wheeler does a cross-examination of the GPL and BSD and why the GPL and Linux specifically have managed to attract a larger number of corporate contributors. "If your goal is to get an idea or approach widely used to the largest possible extent, a permissive license like the BSD (or MIT) license has much to offer. If your goal is to have a useful program that stays useful long-term, then a protective license like the LGPL or GPL licenses has much to offer. Protective licenses force the cooperation that is good for everyone in the long term, if a long-term useful project is the goal."

Stallman: OSDL Patent Project ‘Worse Than Nothing’

Thom Holwerda 2006-09-19 Open Source 38 Comments

An effort by the Open Source Development Labs to help developers defend themselves against software patents has come under fire from FSF founder Richard Stallman, who believes that the plan could backfire. The controversy centers on the issue of patents on software processes, which many believe could threaten the future of open-source software and software innovation in general. Because software processes are abstract, critics say such patents effectively let companies monopolize ideas, without which software can't be developed.

Copyrights, Licenses, CDDL Illustrated

Submitted by ahmetaa 2006-09-19 Open Source 16 Comments

"At the time CDDL was being introduced, I wanted to write an illustrated version of it. Merely because hardly anyone would read the full license text. Even if they did, I doubt 9 out 10 would have understood it completely. A recent CDDL/GPL misunderstanding that made news and started flame wars, prompted me to revisit an old illustration."

Guide to Earning Income from a Free/Open Source Project

Submitted by Max Barkly 2006-09-18 Open Source 12 Comments

This is a collection of methods and strategies to make income from an Open Source project while keeping it thriving and freely available. The methods take into account project brand strength, and the real opportunities available while owning your project's web space, building up its community, and exploring non-restrictive means of monetizing your efforts.

Transcript of Stallman’s Talk at GPLv3 Conference

Thom Holwerda 2006-09-01 Open Source 2 Comments

Yesterday we reported on the transcript of an interview with Stallman at the GPLv3 conference; today, FSF-Europe has posted the transcript to Stallman's actual presentation, including audio and video material. Yes, yesterday's item had the wrong title, in case you're wondering (it said transcript of RMS' talk, instead of 'just' an interview); it is fixed now.

Stallman’s Interview at the 4th International GPLv3 Conference

Submitted by anonymous 2006-08-31 Open Source 51 Comments

The 4th international GPLv3 conference is being held at Bangalore and Richard Stallman is one of the prominent delegates. This is a transcript of the interview with RMS where he is asked a couple of questions related to GPLv3 and free software in general.

GPL: 10 Common Misunderstandings

Submitted by Moulinneuf 2006-08-30 Open Source 58 Comments

"The GNU General Public License is one of the most widely used software licenses - and, undoubtedly, the most misunderstood. Some of this misunderstanding comes from hostile propaganda, but some also comes from a lack of experience in licensing issues on the part of both lawyers and lay users, and the use of standard language in conventional end-user license agreements that are unthinkingly coupled with the GPL. In all cases, the confusion is frequently based on misreadings, rumors, secondhand accounts, and what is convenient to believe."

‘Cipherfunk Shutdown by GPL Police’

Submitted by anonymous 2006-08-25 Open Source 114 Comments

"The cipherfunk web site, which made extra packages available to Ubuntu and MEPIS users, was shut down in response to complaints from Ubuntu team members Matthew Garrett and Philipp Kern. It is my understanding they alleged that cipherfunk was not making modified GPLed source code available in a timely fashion. You can read about it the website." "Well, the GNU GPL states as part of Section 3 of the licence that I must provide source code on request for no more than the cost of physically performing the distribution. Given that the host this box is on actually costs me 110.95AUD every 30 days to run, 9.90AUD, as nice as that is - still will cost me over 100AUD to distribute the code at all." Update: As Matthew Garret pointed out in the comments, he wrote his side of the story on his blog.

Blogger Can’t Tempt Microsoft to Drink OSI Kool-Aid

Thom Holwerda 2006-08-23 Open Source 6 Comments

A Microsoft Shared Source license was submitted to the Open Source Initiative for official approval as an open-source license - but it wasn't Microsoft who submitted it. "Someone submitted the Microsoft Community License, one of our Shared Source licenses, to the OSI without our knowledge or approval, but the OSI contacted us and asked if we wanted them to proceed with that," said Bill Hilf, Microsoft's director for platform technology strategy. "We told them that we did not want to be reactive and needed time to think about it."