PDA

View Full Version : What the hell with the license change on Slimserver? It's not GPL anymore?



kdf
2007-05-22, 12:32
Quoting Malor <Malor.2r024b1179862501 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

>
> Since when is Slimserver not GPL? The new license agreement is
> extremely hostile; it says I can only use Slimserver on devices that
> I've bought from Logitech?
>
> What the hell is going on?

As the writing says when you view the license, it's for firmware:
"The download of any Squeezebox or Transporter firmware included with
this software is subject to legal terms and conditions:"

also see here:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=203637&postcount=4

you can turn off the sirens now, SlimServer code is very much still GPL

-kdf

Malor
2007-05-22, 12:33
Since when is Slimserver not GPL? The new license agreement is extremely hostile; it says I can only use Slimserver on devices that I've bought from Logitech?

What the hell is going on?

amcluesent
2007-05-22, 13:29
Who is surprised that the 'suits' from Logitec are moving in to monetise their purchase?

I guess slimserver will progressively become 'open source' in the same way that the 'Darwin' core of Mac OS X is. Maybe by the legal definition but not in spirit, all the features you actually need are proprietary.

RIP City upon a hill :(

Mitch Harding
2007-05-22, 13:36
I don't think the firmware was ever open source... This doesn't seem to be
a new thing.

On 5/22/07, amcluesent <
amcluesent.2r04nz1179865801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> Who is surprised that the 'suits' from Logitec are moving in to monetise
> their purchase?
>
> I guess slimserver will progressively become 'open source' in the same
> way that the 'Darwin' core of Mac OS X is. Maybe by the legal
> definition but not in spirit, all the features you actually need are
> proprietary.
>
>
> --
> amcluesent
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> amcluesent's Profile:
> http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10286
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=35503
>
>

kdf
2007-05-22, 13:44
Quoting amcluesent <amcluesent.2r04nz1179865801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

>
> Who is surprised that the 'suits' from Logitec are moving in to monetise
> their purchase?

nothing has been changed. The firmware was never open.

> I guess slimserver will progressively become 'open source' in the same
> way that the 'Darwin' core of Mac OS X is. Maybe by the legal
> definition but not in spirit, all the features you actually need are
> proprietary.

You are free to guess, but what is there now is just the same
SlimServer as always, with the same restrictions and freedoms as always.

Nothing new here. Please move on.
-kdf

snarlydwarf
2007-05-22, 13:53
I don't think the firmware was ever open source... This doesn't seem to be
a new thing.

I think SliMP3 code is open source, but very headache inducing. Assembly language for an embedded controller chip is painful. That said, it isn't a new thing... Nor is seeing Vast Conspiracies of Doom from the Logitech acquisition...

I guess it is more fun looking for conspiracies and finding doom than finding the truth...

danco
2007-05-22, 14:11
kdf, how far does your prescience extend?

I note that you have a post showing up with the time of 20:32 (on my machine, with UK time) quoting and replying to Malor's post which shows a time of 20:33.

bklaas
2007-05-22, 14:16
kdf, how far does your prescience extend?

I note that you have a post showing up with the time of 20:32 (on my machine, with UK time) quoting and replying to Malor's post which shows a time of 20:33.

A: at least 1 minute.

seanadams
2007-05-22, 14:30
Yes, it's only for the Squeezebox/Transporter firmware, which has always been closed.

Regarding SLIMP3's firmware - yes, the source is open, although not "Open Source" as defined by FSF. The SLIMP3 firmware license used in 2001 is very similar to the new Logitech Public Source license, which is being used for the new Jive code base. We like open, and although it was not possible to open the Squeezebox firmware because of some inextricable commercially licensed code, we are actually moving towards MORE open source projects with the introduction of Jive.

So I don't know which "suits" you're complaining about. I don't wear one, and I'm the guy who came up with this license strategy some six years ago.

Incidentally, the notion that SlimServer could ever be made closed-source by anyone is pretty far fetched. It links in tons of GPL code written by scores of authors - it's just not feasible even if we wanted to, which we most certainly DO NOT.

byKnight
2007-05-22, 18:06
Who is surprised that the 'suits' from Logitec are moving in to monetise their purchase?


[TOUNGE-IN-CHEEK]
Profits. The very thought makes me shudder!

And, of course, Sean never wanted to make a single penny of profit from all his hard work, did he? Slim Devices was curing AIDS, feeding the hungry, and pushing back against the slaughtering Muslim hoards in Sudan before Logitech moved and spoiled the party.

Damn suits.
[/TOUNGE-IN-CHEEK]
;)

Malor
2007-05-23, 11:22
Sorry for the false alarm: the 'click to accept license' thing was new in my experience. You might want to be clear in that click agreement that the proprietary code is only in the firmware.

kdf
2007-05-23, 12:17
Quoting Malor <Malor.2r1tjn1179944701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

>
> Sorry for the false alarm: the 'click to accept license' thing was new
> in my experience. You might want to be clear in that click agreement
> that the proprietary code is only in the firmware.

Where are you seeing this particular 'click to accept'? The one on
the main download page had the following text introducing the eula form:


The download of any Squeezebox or Transporter firmware included
with this software is subject to legal terms and conditions:

If that's missing, then it might be good to know where it needs to be added.

I do happen to feel that for the money the legal dept gets paid, they
could have at least bothered to tailor the EULA a little better to the
application. "Software" is most certainly not "Firmware" except to
those who have no idea what firmware is.

-kdf