Re: Has Corel been violating the GPL for approx 6 months?
Dear
On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 06:12:35AM +0000, Mr Smith wrote:
> format which where covered by GPL. But they only supplied
> them in binary only format without anything which appeared
> to be a written offer of source code. They where able to
> supply a t-shirt and a "nurf" style blue cube with a warning
> label "not a toy" on it but no written offer of source code.
Damn, you are right. So many people contributed to make the
free software, and some big company like that comes over,
and doesn't follow the rules nor take attention on the licence.
Companies or individuals *can't* distribute binaries without
sources if it is required by the licence, and they have to
comply with every single point written there. If you need some
help just tell me. In case of trouble I could donate something.
Those "excuses" are not acceptable. Those justifing is not
acceptable. I did follow some of happenings which Corel made
on the beginning of the year, and I cannot agree with that.
If that would be the only case, well OK, maybe one could say,
they distribute it now according to policies, and that
is now fine. WELL IT IS NOT DAMN FINE!!!
What some company like Corel would do, if I take their Corel
WhateverPaint Software of 100 MB, and distribute it around or
sell it without paying royalties? They would jump and do
whatever is needed to stop it. I am speaking if that would
happen in the same volume as Corel does it with GNU/Linux.
They would put such a pressure on third company, that
nobody else would ever dare to do the same. Maybe exgagerated,
but it does happen and I know many cases in Germany about that.
Now, Corel is not the only company which violates the GPL.
Here in Germany, the biggest national telecommunication
company called Deutsche Telekom, started selling and distributing,
all over the place their phone-book software on CD, which
includes GTK and Glibc libraries on it, and some BSD software.
They didn't supply Glibc, they didn't inform people about
where to get sources of Gtk or Glibc, they didn't make object
files, they didn't dinamically link it. They even have put
their own licence on it, claiming that nobody else can distribute
the whole package (including their own software), and that no
changes nor reverse engeeniering is allowed. They didn't show
the copyrights, only their own copyrights.
I called the programmer,
and he sent me some kind of dinamically linked software, which
didn't work. I told him to make it according to the licence,
and he didn't do anything - simply no answer after a while.
That programming company and Deutsche Telekom Medien AG, tried
to convince me how they do follow the GPL if they send me, one
person, that dinamically linked software. TO HELL!!!! They are
selling thousands of those CD-ROMs in every city of Germany, in
many catalogs, everywhere. They use Gtk even in Windows versions
(there is version for Windows) and they don't provide the licence.
I know that is happening since September/November 1999, and I have
informed FSF about that, but don't know what really happened.
I did see the same CD in stores before couple of days, it is still
on the display, and still selling it. That is f..... not alright.
If you consider steps against Corel just do it.
If somebody wants a picture of this software from Deutsche Telekom
Medien AG, I can send it. I can scan the licence as well and
every average Linux user could recognize, that software is made
while using the GTK - looks like all Gnome programs. But no licence
on the CD, etc.
Per GPL - their licence is automatically terminated. Or I can simply
take that proprietary software and do with it whatever the GPL allows.
I hate that. One is talking to "big" company, and they don't respond
or react logically. There fore if you have or want to do something
against, do it.
Those issues do have something with every Linux user, if they want to
stay Linux users.
Sincerely,
Marko Cehaja
Reply to: