Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
tor 2015-03-12 klockan 11:20 +0100 skrev Luc Verhaegen: After legal advice has been acquired, i will be happy to do the binary analysis, accounting for every hour, and Allwinner will then end up paying for my time. I can then get the cedrus guys a wide range of hw, and stick some cash in our linux-sunxi infrastructure. Everyone wins. Except allwinner. Probably Allwinner as well in the end.. Regards Henrik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
tor 2015-03-12 klockan 12:41 + skrev Simon Kenyon: releasing a binary that removes GPL code does not discharge the obligation to release the source code for the infringing version you cannot unsteal something The world is not black or white. The above is a matter between the authors and distributors of the involved code where Allwinner is one part, not between you and me. Regards Henrik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Simos I was maintaining the ISL3893 project 10 years ago, where one of the vendor was sued in court in Germany for not giving out the sources: http://isl3893.sourceforge.net/ But that was on the action of copyright holders at the time (Harald Welte). -- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion at ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:25:19AM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. I have done a full symbol analysis of libvecore as shipped on the cubieboard back in august. It clearly shows ffmpeg and libavcodec vs libvp62 and other questionable code whose origins are not clear. It's a txt file, but i should still toss it onto the wiki. I have done a brief nm of the newly LGPLed binary to find libavcodec and libvp62 symbols. I will happily spend a few hours and take that new library apart as i did the older one. I stated that i would do so last week, but i of course have not gotten to that yet. Having an allwinner employee state that that violating code has all been removed now, in this last... Week? That is just not credible. After legal advice has been acquired, i will be happy to do the binary analysis, accounting for every hour, and Allwinner will then end up paying for my time. I can then get the cedrus guys a wide range of hw, and stick some cash in our linux-sunxi infrastructure. Everyone wins. Except allwinner. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Again, if anyone who states anything that is supporting established and proven open source licenses, licenses which allwinner has been proven, without a doubt, to breach, you want to see them removed or at least silenced. How many people will be left in that ideal linux-sunxi community of yours, and how many of them will be able to usefully contribute code, documentation, or user help in your dystopia? Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, 12/3/15, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: [snip] communicate with Allwinner How? Where ARE Allwinner in this? If they're contactable WHERE IS THE SOURCE? I see a big, bad, unresponsive, uncaring company stealing other people's code and not obeying licences. Shame on Allwinner. If you Simos can change them please get on and do so. If not then I see no way in which you are helping. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On 03/12/15 12:12, Simos Xenitellis wrote: However, that analysis would refer to a prior version of the library. In this thread the discussion is about the March 2015 libvdecode.so/libvencode.so libraries. releasing a binary that removes GPL code does not discharge the obligation to release the source code for the infringing version you cannot unsteal something -- simon Simon Kenyon e: simoncken...@gmail.com m: +353 86 240 0005 l: http://ie.linkedin.com/pub/simon-kenyon/0/6b2/744/ s: simonckenyon t: @simonckenyon g: google.com/+SimonKenyon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Hi, if someone want to make a binary analysis/reverse engineering of proprietary driver I would donate to the project. Is there some paypal accepting donations to this project? Or some donation box for the linux-sunxi project as well? Em quinta-feira, 12 de março de 2015 06:25:41 UTC-3, Simos Xenitellis escreveu: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos...@googlemail.com javascript: wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink want...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Simos I was maintaining the ISL3893 project 10 years ago, where one of the vendor was sued in court in Germany for not giving out the sources: http://isl3893.sourceforge.net/ But that was on the action of copyright holders at the time (Harald Welte). -- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion at ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote: On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:25:19AM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this binary analysis. Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. I have done a full symbol analysis of libvecore as shipped on the cubieboard back in august. It clearly shows ffmpeg and libavcodec vs libvp62 and other questionable code whose origins are not clear. It's a txt file, but i should still toss it onto the wiki. If it is a big txt file, it should go to a pastebin and be linked from the Wiki. However, that analysis would refer to a prior version of the library. In this thread the discussion is about the March 2015 libvdecode.so/libvencode.so libraries. Moreover, Quink asked earlier a specific technical question. In terms of code of conduct, if there is no answer to that question, then the question would remain unanswered (for the time being). It's not good to hijack a question and instead another thread should be created. I have done a brief nm of the newly LGPLed binary to find libavcodec and libvp62 symbols. I will happily spend a few hours and take that new library apart as i did the older one. I stated that i would do so last week, but i of course have not gotten to that yet. Having an allwinner employee state that that violating code has all been removed now, in this last... Week? That is just not credible. After legal advice has been acquired, i will be happy to do the binary analysis, accounting for every hour, and Allwinner will then end up paying for my time. I can then get the cedrus guys a wide range of hw, and stick some cash in our linux-sunxi infrastructure. Everyone wins. Except allwinner. In terms of code of conduct documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Again, if anyone who states anything that is supporting established and proven open source licenses, licenses which allwinner has been proven, without a doubt, to breach, you want to see them removed or at least silenced. How many people will be left in that ideal linux-sunxi community of yours, and how many of them will be able to usefully contribute code, documentation, or user help in your dystopia? It is OK to express any relevant viewpoint, as long as it is done respectfully. What I see here, however, is extreme anger, the anger is expressed in the list, and it affects the people in the discussions. In addition, the important issue is how you see yourself in the community, in an aftermath of Luc is now fully satisfied with all licensing issues situation. Do you see yourself content to contribute and communicate with Allwinner for any future mainline efforts? My view is that the accumulating anger has taken its toll and there will be no happy after situation; the interest to contribute would have been exhausted. Simos -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Thu, 12/3/15, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: [snip] The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg Even if true, Allwinner still must release previous versions of infringing code. WHERE IS THE SOURCE LOTS IS MISSING. Sorry for shouting but Allwinner are bad. It's in their hands to change. It's sad, indeed pathetic, to see anyone apologising for and trying to excuse/explain their bad behaviour. No apologies etc are needed, just the sources. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 01:34:18PM +0200, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). Simos Am i reading this right? Do you now wish to see Ben removed from the linux-sunxi community as well? So basically, everyone who wants established and proven open source licenses honoured, you would like to see them removed from linux-sunxi? Good luck with that. Luc Verhaegen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). Simos -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
Hi Simos, On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). Are you referring to Ben's short reply or are you implying that Allwinner follows that code? If it's the former, he probably could have better articulated his comments, if it's the latter, then I believe that not violating the (L)GPL would be considered a violation of that code. Either way, I'll rephrase his comment: In my experience, from what I've seen when other projects have had to deal with license violations, the company accused of violating the license will expend the smallest amount of time and effort required to deal with the accusations. In general, when binary files containing strings referring to some project that is licensed in a manner requiring the release of source code have been released without source code, companies generally fix the situation by removing or replacing the strings instead of rewriting the component or releasing the source code. Or to put it another way, I highly doubt that Allwinner's programmers have rewritten the code they were using from ffmpeg in a non-license-violating manner that quickly. Given Allwinner's previous behaviour (embedding LGPL code in closed source binaries), I highly doubt that anyone here will be satisfied with any solution Allwinner produces that isn't the release of the complete source code licensed under an applicable license. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.cal...@gmail.com Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: OFFTOPIC: Re: [linux-sunxi] Derailed thread
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion zoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink wantl...@gmail.com wrote: I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. I was maintaining the ISL3893 project 10 years ago, where one of the vendor was sued in court in Germany for not giving out the sources: http://isl3893.sourceforge.net/ But that was on the action of copyright holders at the time (Harald Welte). -- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion at ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups linux-sunxi group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
