On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:25:22 -0500, Matthew wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Comments within. (I am personally uncomfortable including the GPL > violations people until we have a clear direction from the leadership > of the flightgear project as to the direction the project would like > to go). ..ok, this far I have found a fake physical address, suggesting my suspicion is confirmable. So I cc. ..unless New Zealand allow a fake address, a fake company, a fake name etc, these are illegally registred web sites. > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 1:49 AM, Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > ... > > > > > Still, the question is if this company is violating the GPL. We > > > have no proof of that. > > > > ..I'm checking my wee mirrors to find out. ;o) > > > The GPL can only be violated when they distribute the software. Their > website doesn't entail them distributing. Action can only be taken > if there is a clear violation (ie: they distribute a flightgear > derived product without an offer of distributing source. Who knows, > they may include the source in the DVD or CD that they ship. > > I personally don't want to charge forward and claim a violation when > nothing has been distributed. ..well maybe you don't have to ;o), there's 7Zip, Wesnoth etc at http://www.idbproductions.com/Products/ all rather strongly suggesting at least a conspiracy to commit software piracy, rather than lawful distribution under the GPL. So, I am not worried about defending my suspicions in courts. ;o) > > (The gpl-violations.org guys go after people who > > are not honoring the release of source for both distributed and > > derived works - typically in embedded systems. Usually they settle > > when the company honors the GPL and provides source or stops > > distributing the offending product.) > > ..aye, this means they have valuable experience > > and can guide us. ;o) > > > > > At this stage it appears that they are simply selling a binary > > > distribution of a set of OSS applications. > > > > ..then, in good faith, they shouldn't mind saying so. > > My opinion now is, these people are common criminals, > > or a tSCOG-style Microsoft proxy team. > > http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html > > http://gpl-violations.org/faq/legal-faq.html > > http://gpl-violations.org/faq/sourcecode-faq.html > > http://gpl-violations.org/faq/vendor-faq.html > > > > But they do say that - http://flight-aviator.com/ > > === > [image: flight]Based on the award winning Flight Gear project > > [image: flight]All from the thriving Open Source Community, this sim > is forever changing > > === ..but _no_ mention of _which_ license. > > > As mentioned before, ethics or questionable business practices > > > aside, we need to focus on what they are actually violating. > > > Even the wikipedia screen shots are licensed under the GPL can be > > > re-used freely. > > > > ..aye. Removals of "FlightGear.org" and "GPL" etc around > > these screen shots, would prove a few things though. ;o) > > > I don't see what you are saying. The screenshots don't seem to be > trimmed - beyond a possible crop here or there. ..we shall see. ;o) > http://www.flight-aviator.com/images/fps/multiplayer-map.jpg as well > as http://www.flight-aviator.com/images/getstart11x.jpg don't seem to > be hiding it from being (or being derived from flightgear). The lack > of attribution is not quite nice, but is a common mistake. .._active_ removal takes it that one step further. ;o) > Again, if the flightgear leadership, or the creators (and hence > copyright owners) of the images have particular concern then that can > put forward when a direction is chosen. ..this is not just us (FG). > > ..and keep in mind, top posting is not quite comme-il-feaut > > at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;o) > > > I understand, but the google mobile client provides no options to > inline quote or bottom quote. (I would actually expect that from a > legal perspective a top-posted email thread is far more valuable than > a inline posted... But that is a different discussion. :) ..in those cases we have real mail clients that can handle mail list threads in a manner convenient for litigation discovery. ;o) > Please note that I am not saying take no action, I am just saying > take a few days to gather what each copyright owner who is impacted > wants and ensure a plan is prepared before taking action. > > Remember, the emotive aspect - although it is real and affects people > personally - should not be the prime driver for individuals. The > legal framework that each person has implicitly or explicitly has > agreed to is what should be driven. (I had a long discussion with > some people from Creative Commons that people should also be made > aware of what they are giving up. If you CC-Share Alike an image, > and then see that image being used to promote something you > personally find distasteful - have given up your right to control > what the downstream person does with the image. You have no > fundamental recourse unless the downstream restricts other people > from the Share Alike rights within the license. You may not like it, > but you gave up your right to control that when you licensed it. The > same goes with the GPL. ..er, not quite, especially not under GPLv2, but let's concentrate on _fact_ discovery for now, eh? ;o) > As mentioned before, I see the baseline direction should be at least > the following. > > 1) Respect copyright - The images and and so on should attributed > fully 2) Respect the GPL - If the flightgear derived binaries that are > distributed are not accompanied by source or an offer to provide the > source that created the binary, then actions should be taken to > ensure that it is available. > > 1) is fairly obvious, but 2) will need someone to buy the CD before > taking further actions. ..or _otherwise_ find evidence of copyright violations. ;o) > Regards, > > Matthew -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
