osfree.org

#201 From: "os2bird" <bird@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 5:30 pm
Subject: Re: Unable to help: LEGAL issues must be cleared out first!!! os2bird
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


--- In osFree@y..., "criguada@l..." <criguada@l...>
wrote:
> Hi Knut,
>
> > I sincerely would have liked to help in a
> > opensource project for (re)implementing OS/2.
> > But the legal issues make that impossible for
me.
>
> Nobody stops you from beginning coding something
that will be useful, no
> matter what kernel we use. Join one of the groups
(or start one
> yourself), and sooner or later we will have our
free, opensource, clean,
> OS/2 clone.

It will _never_ be clean if these legal issues
remain unsolved.

> Noone says we have to use the present osFree
binaries. We can start
> developing, and testing on our present (legally
purchased) kernels,
> until we have a suitable compatible kernel built
from scratch.

yeah, of course we can. And I hope we will...


But, I am unable to join in as long as the
"technology preview" is available
from www.osfree.org and not yet legally confirmed
or condemnd.

It's interseting what OpenBeOS states about the
same problem in they're faq:
http://open-beos.sourceforge.net/faq.php


The legal issues MUST be resolved ASAP!
There are a lot of people which is unable to help
you because of this issues.
I'm just one of them...


Kind Regards
knut

#202 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 5:33 pm
Subject: Re: Unable to help: LEGAL issues must be cleared out first!!! mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:06:11 -0000, os2bird wrote:

>Hi!
>
>I sincerely would have liked to help in a
>opensource project for (re)implementing OS/2.
>But the legal issues make that impossible for me.
>
==============================
I would definitly have you in the project !
==============================

I cannot undo the TPE release. Thats impossible !
Its out there and I was probably too "blue-eyed".

== What should we (I) do to make you happy ? ===
======================================
* If you want us to terminate any support for the TPE release I'll
(personally) do that as soon as its proven to use "stolen" code.

* If they have indeed used an disassembler and are willing to change
their licence I still think its a bit dumb but its no longer illegal.

They have (from the one disass file I got) tried to change things and to
me that means they want to do something.

I cannot throw out people since they feel in a certain way.
If you think that IBM should be ripped of or if you think that
IBM should be protected by all means thats up to you to
*think* so. And it has nothing to do with osFree.

But if you want to participate in the "osFree project to create
an opensource free OS/2 clone" you must follow this:
******************************************************************************
The code we build must be opensource and as clean as possible.
******************************************************************************
If you cannot agree to this (for whatever reason) you should not participate.

And thats an absolut demand I must put on everyone, member of the
TPE team, myself or birdos2.

Anyone that wants to follow this rule should help out !

===discussion===================================
>1. Disassemble the kernels using a tool like IDA pro.
>The first one is very problemous, if not illegal in
>most countries. For example I can't help you guys
>when living in norway.
>
Thats what I wrote in the package I put on hobbes with
the disassembled resource.sys.

Its not illegal to disassemble the file or the whole OS.
Its not illegal to spread this to everyone that:
*has an existing IBM os/2 Warp 4 licence*

Its stupid to spread compiled variant of a disassembly
and not add the licence text. Its probably also illegal
but I doubt anyone meant it that way.

I'm unsure if its Illegal to disassemble, modify, build
and spread *with* the licence text. I doubt its illegal
since IBM is not losing anything, no lost sales, no
lost secrets(*). Only people that already has it and
can very well do it themselves may use/see it.
But it may be as stupid...

(*) If you can reviele secret by disassembling they it must
be illegal for anyone that knows the intel opcodes to look
at the code with a hex viewer
===============================================




Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#203 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 5:55 pm
Subject: Re: Re: My take on this.. Not legal to use IBM source mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 14:14:42 -0000, raprapand wrote:

>--- In osFree@y..., "JMA" <mail@j...> wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 11:10:16 -0000, drittervonfuenf wrote:
>>
>> >You don't have a clue what you are taking about.
>> >If you take more than 3 chords outof a someone elses
>> >pice of music, you need to have his permission and you have to pay
>> >royalties as well.
>> >
>> You will have to acnowledge the compositour to perform it in public and
>> pay royalties *if* you make money of it.
>
>No, you have no pay even if you don't make money of it.
>
In some cases, yes.
Ask Kris he *knows* for sure


>> Have you ever seen writings done by students in the university, they
>> are full of text written by somone else. Look at articles written by
>> journalists.
>>
>> As long as you say who it is you commented/copied and dont make
>> any money out of it its perfectly legal
>
>Still, it has nothing to do if you make money of it. You are entitled
>to quote from interlectual property, but you are not intitled to copy
>all of it. How much you can quote differs from case to case. I'm a
>journalist, I know
>
Sure I'm not allowed to do a complete ripoff of someones work.
I have seen several cases in my country where someone (often
in academic work) copies a writing and forgets (willingly or not)
to pay for it. They get sued and have to pay up.

I have never seen a case where someone (willingly or not) gives
away copies of someones writing and gets sued for that.

It would probably be possible to sue for it but as there are no
money to be gained (unless you can blame it on the institution)
these cases never goes to court.

So money is an important factor


>The problem with using IBMs source code is that a serious company
>and/or coder will not be associated with the project. Besides IBM can
>pull the plug on the project any time they wish - andthey will
>actually have do this, when they find out about the project. If they
>don't defend their interlectual property they might loose the right to it.
>
Lets ignore the team that did the TPE. If they canot follow the rules for
this project they should do something else.

=== But lets for a while discuss IBM: ========================
We must assume that IBM knows about the "leaked" source. We must
also assume it was not a sanctioned deliberate leak (though not public).

Now, the leak is being discussed in some small forum and possibly
someone has used the leak to build his own binaries.

What does IBM stand to lose or gain ?

Its quite obvious for everyone that can read that IBM is pulling the plug
from under OS/2. Next year it will be impossible to purchase a OS/2
licence from IBM without some very special (read expensive) contract.
In 2006 IBM will stop supporting OS/2.

In a ideal world all the customers IBM care about(*) should migrate
to another OS as soon as possible, preferable today.

Now if I was IBM I would use the "leak" to tell the remaining customers:
"a leak has occured, we cannot protect you anymore, please migrate ASAP".

Why would IBM bother to sue some small developer. It would hit the press
at once and everyone would write about it as the "big bad blue" giant that
kills the OS and the developers as people that want to salvage the hobbyis
OS/2 operating system to the opensource community.

IBM would gain from not bothering in public but use the knowledge in private
when talkning to their customers.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not saying this allows anyone to copy their source !

(*) When talkning about IBM customers you as I knows that only very big
companies with other huge investments in IBM hardware/software are of
any interest for IBM.
======================================================




Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#204 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 6:01 pm
Subject: Re: Legal issues - Why don't you just ask IBM? mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:06:39 -0000, maratcolumn1 wrote:

>I mean it. Write IBM damn official fscking request: we've found some
>sources here, don't you mind if we build and distribute 'em?
>Regardless of legislation in different countries no one will use this
>system unless IBM would admit it. Point.
>
Thats what I will do if anyone ever puts it on my site (come on all you
"I have it" guys).

ftp://jma.dnsalias.com/osfree/dropzone/
noread directory, access not logged.

I want the source for two reasons:

1) to look at it and see if the TPE release is build with it
2) Contact IBM and the athourities and tell them I have it
and ask them what I should do with it.

Btw 2) is the correct legal way to go if you find something you
are unsure of its legality.




Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#205 From: "Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2)" <bart2@...>
Date: Sat Feb 23, 2002 6:20 pm
Subject: Re: Unable to help: LEGAL issues must be cleared out first!!! ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:06:11 -0000, os2bird wrote:
>[...]
>But, until I get a clear answer I am completely
>unable to help osFree. Sorry.
>I'm not the only one in this position.

Knut, what about the following scenario: since most of us, disqualify current
osFree
binary, we can discard this, and since we have already gathered togather here,
start
working on it from scratch (but to be able to run current OS/2 binaries and
drivers) -
would it be ok?
(The above is also for Eriik and Achim, and ohers)
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl

#206 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 6:31 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Unable to help: LEGAL issues must be cleared out first!!! mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 14:30:41 -0000, os2bird wrote:

>It will _never_ be clean if these legal issues
>remain unsolved.
>
I dont quite follow you.

This project has a requirment that anyone participating
MUST follow. They may think what they want but the
MUST follow what I wrote.

>But, I am unable to join in as long as the
>"technology preview" is available
>from www.osfree.org and not yet legally confirmed
>or condemnd.
>
Thats understandable.

Now you put me in a hard position. Some people will
not join if the binaries are there. Some peole will leave
if the binaries are removed.

I as you would like a quick resolution of this
Are the binaries "build from leaks"(*) or are they "just"
released without the correct credits.

The difference between you and me is that I dont
want to wait. So I stated rules for this project:
====================================
I did a requirment: Follow it or dont participate !
====================================

I'll ensure the TPE distro is removed as soon as its
proven "build from leaks". But I cannot take arguments
like Eiriks: "I have the sources so I would know !"
His arguments are far to dangerous !



(*) I refuse to use the word illegal until its proven in
court, but thats just me

>It's interseting what OpenBeOS states about the
>same problem in they're faq:
>http://open-beos.sourceforge.net/faq.php
>
OK let me say I added this to osFree:
================================================================================
===================
I heard a rumor that some official IBM OS/2 source code has been leaked. That
would be great for the osFree project, right?

Wrong !

To be crystal clear about this, osFree wants in no way to come in contact with
or be associated with any leaked IBM OS/2 source code.
Having access to that code could potentially be very damaging to the project,
not to mention a legal nightmare.
================================================================================
===================

Would this mean that everone that has seen the sources will not be able to
participate ?
In that case I must (if I'm to believe Eirik) remove most professional OS/2
developers from the project.

Or should I just ignore that lots of people that more or less admits they have
the sources and go ahead anyway ?

Thats why I wrote the rule as I did. If you have seen the source I dont want you
to be left out. But I dont want any IBM OS/2 source
code in osFree unless IBM allows us !






Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#207 From: "Oliver Poggensee" <rastamann@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 6:35 pm
Subject: Re: license issues (GPL or not) rastamann@...
Send Email Send Email


On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:18:31 +0100, JMA wrote:

>I must agree with you, we should not stop comercial use of whatever gets
>written unless we really have to (GNU tools etc.).
>
>Could you please look at the existing licences and tell us what one seems
>to suit us best. Then lets use that on any code we write !


Here is a list with 31 open source licenses.
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html

Maybe we should first define what we want to allow/prohibit and than find the
best one
or write one.

- code must be open source.
- allow distributors to sell osFree.
- allow to bundle osFree with closed source commercial/shareware applications
and
sell it as one package

comments?

Oliver

#208 From: "os2bird" <bird@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 6:42 pm
Subject: Re: Unable to help: LEGAL issues must be cleared out first!!! os2bird
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


>On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:06:11 -0000, os2bird wrote:
>
>>Hi!
>>
>>I sincerely would have liked to help in a
>>opensource project for (re)implementing OS/2.
>>But the legal issues make that impossible for me.
>>
>==============================
> I would definitly have you in the project !
)
>==============================
>
>I cannot undo the TPE release. Thats impossible !
>Its out there and I was probably too "blue-eyed".
>
>== What should we (I) do to make you happy ? ===
>======================================
>* If you want us to terminate any support for the
TPE
>release I'll (personally) do that as soon as its
proven
>to use "stolen" code.
Good.

>* If they have indeed used an disassembler and are
>willing to change their licence I still think its
a
>bit dumb but its no longer illegal.
Sorry, not here in norway.


>I cannot throw out people since they feel in a
certain way.
>If you think that IBM should be ripped of or if
you
>think that IBM should be protected by all means
thats
>up to you to *think* so. And it has nothing to do
>with osFree.
Correct! But that was not my question. (see
discussion below)

>But if you want to participate in the "osFree
project
>to create an opensource free OS/2 clone" you
>must follow this:
>**************************************************
**
> The code we build must be opensource and as clean
> as possible.
Completely agreed!
>**************************************************
**
>If you cannot agree to this (for whatever reason)
>you should not participate.
>
>And thats an absolut demand I must put on
everyone,
>member of the TPE team, myself or os2bird.
>
>Anyone that wants to follow this rule should help
out !

>===discussion===================================
>>1. Disassemble the kernels using a tool like IDA
pro.
>>The first one is very problemous, if not illegal
in
>>most countries. For example I can't help you guys
>>when living in norway.
>>
>Thats what I wrote in the package I put on hobbes
with
>the disassembled resource.sys.
>
>Its not illegal to disassemble the file or the
whole OS.
That's correct for me. But not necessarily for a US
citizen.

>Its not illegal to spread this to everyone that:
>*has an existing IBM os/2 Warp 4 licence*
Sorry. That's not necessarily true in all
countries. And as long as it isn't, I
cannot see why osFree should do so.
I for example can't use anything published like
that, that will be illegal.
You can perhaps post a patch, like Daniella (IIRC)
did for the os2ldr. But a
full binary, not in norway at least.

>Its stupid to spread compiled variant of a
disassembly
>and not add the licence text. Its probably also
illegal
>but I doubt anyone meant it that way.
Well then it got to be fixed. I guess it's no
coincidence that you can't find
the osf_[en|ru].* files on hobbes anymore..

>I'm unsure if its Illegal to disassemble, modify,
build
>and spread *with* the licence text. I doubt its
illegal
>since IBM is not losing anything, no lost sales,
no
>lost secrets(*). Only people that already has it
and
>can very well do it themselves may use/see it.
>But it may be as stupid...
Here in norway you can't do so. Sorry.
And I'm afraid US laws are stricter than the
norwegian.

Kind Regards,
knut

#209 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 6:45 pm
Subject: Re: license issues (GPL or not) mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:35:29 +0100 (CET), Oliver Poggensee wrote:

>On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:18:31 +0100, JMA wrote:
>
>>I must agree with you, we should not stop comercial use of whatever gets
>>written unless we really have to (GNU tools etc.).
>>
>>Could you please look at the existing licences and tell us what one seems
>>to suit us best. Then lets use that on any code we write !
>
>
>Here is a list with 31 open source licenses.
>http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html
>
>Maybe we should first define what we want to allow/prohibit and than find the
best one
>or write one.
>
>- code must be open source.
Yes.

>- allow distributors to sell osFree.
No

>- allow to bundle osFree with closed source commercial/shareware applications
and sell it as one package
>
Yes.




Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#210 From: "criguada@..." <criguada@...>
Date: Fri Feb 22, 2002 6:46 pm
Subject: NewOS criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


Hi all,

reading the OpenBeOS FAQ I found out this one: http://newos.sourceforge.net.

Please, those knowledgeable in kernel coding look through it, and report
how good it would be to base an OS/2-compatible kernel upon.
This seems a fresh implementation, without unix heritage.

Here are a few lines from the website:

Implemented Features

* Multithreaded
* Multiprocessor
* Fully reentrant kernel
* Protected memory
* Separate user and kernel space
* Text-based console
* Full locking primitives
* Kernel debugging support with installable debugger commands and
remote gdb support
* Modern VM design (demand paging, swapping, memory mapping), with
support for full filesystem cache integration
* Dynamically loadable kernel modules: drivers, filesystems, generic
modules
* Full virtual filesystem layer, device file system
* Initial support for iso9660 and ext2fs filesystems
* Full user space shared lib support
* Kernel based network stack (UDP/IP for now)
* Remote block device
* Basic VESA mode support with generic framebuffer console



Bye

Cris