Is Sveasoft breaking GNU GPL?

[nzimmers]

Sveasoft modifies firmware used on linksys routers. they switced thier policy of making source code available, and are charging $20 to access to "beta" software. I'm betting nothing will get released.


This is a very interesting page: http://wrt54g.thermoman.de/

seems sveasoft is stepping outside of the relm of good tastes and sent this to a person who had posted some beta software on a webpage. Rmemeber, this is from the owner of Sveasoft...........

You really should do some background research on who you are f*****g
with. Iwill eventually find out exactly who you are and where you live and
then we're gonna have some real fun.


I'm really surprised this passed under the radar at anandtech...........the guy has figured out a way to circumvent the GNU GPL and is making money off of it.

doc

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Not trying to slam anyone, just wondering who you are. Party to this particular debate, or just a user who knows that "Sveasoft" is being a bunch of ... what's the word? Ah yes - Assholes.

This might do better in Off-Topic, where loads of hungry nefs are waiting to devour companies that suck. Even better is that the sveasoft email contacts are listed.

- M4H

 

[nzimmers]

Hi there,

Nope, not a party involved. I am reader of "I, Cringley" and saw this article:

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20040722.html

Now, initially I agreed with Bob, but then somethings got me wondering after I checked the Sveasoft website. I checked all around the 'net and it seems many people feel Sveasoft is riding on the knife's edge of the GPL.......

I know a good number of intelligent people frequent this forum and when I did a search for "sveasoft" there was nothing about it in message board archives. So I'm just bringing attention to the issue.

Now that I think about it, you're right, this belongs in the off-topic, it doesn't directly deal with hardware..............

could someone kindly move this thread there?

 

[VirtualLarry]

My understanding of how it works, is basically GPL, but with a really sinister and un-ethical twist.

You pay your fee, supposedly not for the software, but for "support", in order to access the forums, and recieve access to the "pre-release" binaries. However, the binaries (and source, if you request them), are individually "tagged" to you. So if you so choose to exercise your legal rights under the GPL, all access to paid support, and future "pre-release" updates are voided.

Basically, you are placed into a contractual situation, that you have to choose between being able to take advantage of your paid support and access to new updates, or to be allowed to exercise your right under the GPL. Very sneaky, but also very evil, IMHO. The GPL wasn't intended to be exploited in that way. Worse yet, the main programmer seems to think that he somehow "owns" the code, often calling it "his", when it is basically just a bunch of hacks and modifications. Pretty sleazy altogether, if you ask me. I wouldn't recommended supporting that fellow, nor his blatant abuse of the spirit of the GPL.

Not to mention, the almost certainty that there is some sort of "phone home" or tracking device, to be able to allow them to determine if you have shared your binary copy of your firmware with someone as well, as doing so would undermine their profit plan, if no-one had to pay their "support fee" to gain access to new releases. Would you trust your perimiter security to a company that was willing to stoop to such un-ethical behavior? I sure wouldn't.

 

[TerryMathews]

As much of a slimeball as Sveasoft is, I have to applaud them for finally getting people to notice that 'free as in speech' does not automatically imply 'free as in beer'. The GPL does not state that all GPLed software must be 'free as in beer', just that the source must be available to anyone who purchases the binary.

If Sveasoft is doing something along the lines of "You purchase the download rights to one revision of our pre-release firmware. Should you choose to not redistribute it as is your right under the GPL, we will continue to provide you with updates, on the house. We are under no contractual obligation to do so however, as you have only purchased one revision.", then they are right on the knife's edge of the GPL, but should still be legal.

 

[nzimmers]

I think what really struck me is that there have been reports of sveasoft software on P2P and other sources that have been modified by sveasoft to allow back doors, control, and even curruption of nvram in the hardware

- imagine if Microsoft included backdoors it's OS that allowed them to wipe out your MB bios to the point it could not be salvaged if they suspected you were using an illegeal copy.

It's important not to forget that many many people have worked and contributed on open source software, in the case of Sveasoft I believe it's a trimmed down version of linux, and the amount of man hours that linux represents is in the order of hundred of thousuands, if not millions.

compare Sveasoft's actions against redhat or any of the other linux distibutions........I think it's quite clear who is and who isn't conducting business in the spirit of GNU and GPL.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Old news, and it's been discussed in another part of Anandtech.

Anyhow, it's a damn shame someone is doing something like this. I can't even imagine why. Then again, I'm not much of a fan of the GPL either.

 

[Sunner]

If everything on that German site is true, he should have a case against the Sveasoft guy, since the latter has clearly made false claims regarding the files hosted on that site.

 

[0roo0roo]

look at the hot deals thread. yes theres shiftiness going on. finding his nonbetas is next to impossible on his site. i never did, i got em off links from other sites.