Possible GPL violation by Armorware inc

[John]

It's a great pity that the gpl doesn't limit selling. Seem to remember that a 
lot of early shareware/freeware usually on floppy used to have  a clause in 
the licence that effectively stated that the software could be sold on but 
only at a level that covered materials and reasonable distribution costs etc. 
Suse, Redhat and co effectively do that. Some might argue that they shouldn't 
but a distro is well worth buying  in a box if one is new to linux. Suse for 
instance include support, a book, on line updates and other add ons in their 
packages that are extremely good value for money. Maybe one can download the 
lot but the DVD's are a lot less hassle. Buying the distro helps them keep 
going. One can not expect them to run like a charity. Rip of merchants such 
as Armorware may be are another matter though. The question aught to be - 
Does the add on code represent reasonable value for money? If not then the 
gpl holders aught to be able to stop them from both using and selling it or 
maybe even charge them for using it. One crazy thought. The "gpl" aught to be 
a charity. Some major players might be interested in making serious 
contributions to it. Eventually the funds would give it a sting that all 
players would have to take notice of.

Regards
John

On Saturday 10 December 2005 03:42, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Nigel Henry wrote:
> > On Friday 09 December 2005 18:16, Rex Dieter wrote:
> >>Given that you apparently don't have a copy of the CD, which is where
> >>the "conspicuous and appropriate" publication of copyright (and other
> >>stuff) is required to be, how can you allege a GPL violation?
> >>
> >>Am I missing something?
> >
> > Hi Rex. I hope you have nothing to do with Armoreware, otherwise I;m
> > probably going to seriously insult you.
>
> Rest assured, I have nothing to do with them... I just have a problem
> with folks making false or unfounded assertions in the name of the GPL.
>
> > At $485 if they have any sense the GPL licence
> > is in order. They appear, according to the manual, to be using as a basis
> > for their product a Knoppix live CD with their own code added. having
> > recently
>
> ...
>
> > To think that I can take a Linux app, add a few hundred lines of code,
> > keeping the original GPL licence intact for the original app, and then
> > charging Whatever I like for my "new product" . Man, this just doesn't
> > seem right. I'm sorry if my remarks offend you, but is just the way I
> > feel.
>
> I'm not offended.  If their product really isn't that good, hopefully
> they won't have any customeris.  The fact is, the GPL doesn't prevent
> people from selling GPL'd software.  Sorry if that offends you.
>
> -- Rex
> ___________________________________________________
> This message is from the kde mailing list.
> Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
> Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
> More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.