Re: [LAD] Fwd: Fw: Re: At the hands of Professor Keller and Raymond

I'm not taking sides here, but there's also something to keep in mind.

The GPL isn't a tool to beat people around the head with. And here,
probably more than any other GPL based community, there's a lot of
knowhow, and experience, in dealing with GPL matters. Sometimes things
get out of hand, but there's enough sane voices to bring some degree
of reason to the discussion.

From what's been posted, it seems the original author may not have
been aware of the GPL and its important implications. Up until 18
months ago, i never knew it existed, and after only after my adventure
in Linux and opensource began, did it sit down and take in what it
means. It's not to be taken lightly, and for whatever reason, an
author of an application or code may want to reflect for some time,
before taking the plunge or not.

Forking a project is by it's nature, and GPL "rights" aside, quite an
impact on the author. He or she may have been sweating over their code
base for some time, and i don't think anyone could say they wouldn't
feel a bit awkward if they saw their code being forked, and developed
further. Even more so for those who may not have developed their code
under the assumption of GPL. From an "outsider's" point of view, it
would seem like a big decision to take both ways, if both parties have
any sort of empathy.

You seem to be legally correct in the position you've taken, so no
argument there.

From a human communication point of view, i would dare say most
authors would feel a bit put out by your manner, and the enthusiasm
with which you've gleefully "grabbed" the code, and waved the GPL
flag. It certainly looks that way from here.

I'm not throwing rocks at you, or as i wrote, taking sides. But waving
the license alone doesn't provide a "getout" clause to put aside basic
decent behaviour. If the author wasn't aware of the implications of
the GPL on his code, he certainly will be now, and maybe that's a good
thing. But the approach could have been handled differently. Maybe if
you'd taken the time and effort to explain what the GPL implied, then
the author, armed with this information, may have been more
forthcoming.

you obviously wanted the code for this particular project, and wanted
it fairly certainly it seems.

Verbally bludgeoning people into submission, and getting extremely
personal, to get your way, may not be the right approach.

Alex.

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 5:19 PM, <laseray@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 July 2009 08:01:36 alex stone wrote:
>> Just on a more serious note, amidst all this mayhem and frivolity, we
>> forked a project recently to more specifically add and modify a set of
>> tools for a defined purpose.
>> Unlike this trainwreck, we not only tried our best to do so in a
>> decent way, but the original author was thoroughly civilised about it,
>> and showed a lot of class in his positive and encouraging responses.
>>
>> I certainly learned a lot from the process, and have even more respect
>> for Chris (Cannam) as a result.
>>
>> It goes without saying that if Chris can use anything we write, then
>> he's most welcome to do so, and has our encouragement as well.
>>
>> There's a way to do this that doesn't involve throwing digital
>> hatchets or burning anyone at the stake.
>
> Yes, but that could not be done in this case. Seemingly, people have not
> been paying attention. The nice approach was tried almost a year ago now.
> The same obnoxious attitude persists now with the original Impro-Visor side
> of things, so action had to be taken. When doing the right thing causes
> people to almost line up against the one in the right, what does that say
> about those people? Some have not. My thanks go to them, for actually having
> properly read the GPL and understanding the obligations involved.
>
> For others, I believe they are all having some kind of residual effect left
> over from childhood when parents and adults told them to never quarrel
> or fight. As if all such attitudes can only lead to bad outcomes. The fact
> is that civilized societies are built on argument, debate. That is how laws
> are put into place to make life better. People must argue to make
> improvements, else we will all be at the mercy of a few with all the power
> deciding unfairly what is right or wrong for all of us. As opposed to having a
> democratic process in place that is not supposed to discriminate without
> proper cause. Try to get past this idea that all arguments are bad, they
> aren't. They lead to results you won't get if you just sit around on your
> hands. Such is what happened in this case.
>
> If I had interacted with someone like Chris, that would have been great,
> then things would certainly have worked out better. But that is not the case.
> I work on other FOSS projects, and aside from one other projects, I have never
> had any problems like this. The other people I interact with are willing to
> discuss things, clearly, openly, logically, and without resorting to personal
> attacks on my character. Disagreements do occur from time to time, but they
> just do not have the same self-inflated and arrogant motivation I have
> experience with Impro-Visor.
>
> There are lots of projects out there that pretend to be FOSS, using GPL
> or whatever license. Then when you try to do what you are allowed
> they react in a very proprietary manner. So there is a phenomena at play with
> this--some developers riding the free software wagon just so they can claim to
> be doing that, to get recognition, boost their egos, or whatever.
>
> Learn to see this people. It is very scummy behavior that deserves no less
> than being attacked and shamed into compliance. In fact, these are the exact
> tactics that various GPL legal defender organizations use. So what I have done
> is completely inline with them. Anybody who thinks otherwise has not done
> their homework. So please go do some research before putting in your
> comments that fall on the side of defending a violator. Never mind the
> warm fuzzy feelings you want, get results. Impro-Visor has made it
> impossible to cooperate, never mind the seemingly nice attitude pretentiously
> given by those on that side about the issue. Only the facts count.
>
> And the fact remains that Impro-Visor is still violating the GPL. Go check
> for yourself, don't take my word for it. You will know who is really right
> when you realize that this is a consistent pattern of behavior on their
> part. Don't be fooled by childish excuses that sound like someone telling
> their primary school teacher they forgot their homework. Responsibility
> first, responsibility!
>
> Raymond
>
> P.S. Bob kicked me off his Yahoo group with this "new" release he just made.
> Why would he do that? He never let me post any message previously without
> censoring or dumping them. So I haven't even sent any that might be
> questionable to him since last year because of this. He is just trying to
> prevent me from getting at the files he is releasing. Apparently he must be
> afraid of something or doing something wrong. And he is, GPL violations still
> exist on that group with this release. Go check for yourselves.
>
> Can you see more now the kind of person he is?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>

-- 
www.openoctave.org
midi-subscribe@email-addr-hidden
development-subscribe@email-addr-hidden
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev