New
#1
So they're telling that Linux can't be used in a virtual emulating software? That's absurd.
VMware alleged to have violated LinuxVirtualization software maker VMware is facing a lawsuit alleging that it has been violating the GPLv2 free software license for years with its use of Linux and other source code in ESXi
No I believe they Linux is saying VMware and their not so free version are mostly Linux without stating so or paying Linux for the code
Hi there
does that mean also that ANY commercial application designed for Linux is breaking "copyright".
In any case one would have to define "What is Linux". If "Linux" is an OS (although I think it is Torvalds who owns the KERNEL patent / copyright) then in no way is VMWARE WORKSTATION or PLAYER an OS since it needs to be started as an application under control of another OS.
ESXi is another issue - but there are FREE versions of that and in any case you only pay for the SUPPORT.
Same as RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise server) used by zillions of companies and netting Red Hat a very large income. You pay for the Support.
"Case closed M'lud ---- Next Case please...." !!!
Cheers
jimbo
Could be I'm sure it will be a long time before anyone knows for sure :)
All the money in the mean time goes to the lawyers
Hi there.
In Germany can you believe it Court Documents are STILL not open to the public -- shades of "The Stasi" still here -- mind you I'm not sure how much creedence those old "People's Courts" were ever given.
I think if I were CEO at VMWARE I'd tell the Hamburg Court to "Go and --ck a Duck" and not even bother to turn up -- this Court case is so rediculously an utter waste of time trying to find work and generate income for redundant Lawyers.
Cheers
jimbo
I'm not sure which of the two has more money but the Linux side was asking for donations to pursue the case so that might give a hint :)
But yea just blank out Germany for the VMware products seems the easiest unless the Linux guys bailout for lack of funds :/
At first it seems they just wanted recognition or credits for the free product ?
If the courts don't punish VMware and uphold the copyright/licenses conditions that will set a precedent; everyone can ignore software copyright/licenses."In addition to other ways VMware has not complied with the requirements of the GPL, Conservancy and Hellwig specifically assert that VMware has combined copyrighted Linux code, licensed under GPLv2, with their own proprietary code called 'vmkernel' and distributed the entire combined work without providing nor offering complete, corresponding source code for that combined work under terms of the GPLv2," the Conservancy wrote. "Hellwig is an extensive copyright holder in the portions of Linux that VMware misappropriated and used together in a single, new work without permission."
Germany could then set up a thriving torrent server industry.
So what you are saying is that only "little people" have to obey software copyright/license conditions.
Hi there
There's absolutely NO infringement here -- the products are FREE - you pay for maintenance -- same as If I'm helping someone to fix a Windows machine - I don't have to pay Ms. Similarly if I write an application that works on Windows I don't pay Ms a royalty for using Windows. In fact I'm more likely to be REWARDED. !!
What about Apple's OS. I'm sure there's loads of Linux code in that - Suing Apple is probably a potentially much more lucrative game as by Apple's standards the amount of money would be so trivial that they'd pay just to get rid of "the Nuisance" Factor.
I'd be more sympathetic of a German Court if it would open up documents to public scrutiny - especially in a case that could have public interest.
By any reasonable criterion Esxi is NOT copyright infringement. What about companies like CITRIX which also create their own HYPERVISORS and CHARGE for the product. Don't tell me that there's no Linux type kernel in that offering.
This seems too much like people playing silly bu---rs with the Court system.
Maybe they should let the EU handle this --that organisation has loads of time to play with this type of stuff instead of worrying about the curvature of Bananas and whether the new "purple" tomatoes can rightfully be called "Tomatoes".
Cheers
jimbo
There is a difference between GPL and GPLv2.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
You are not allowed to incorporate GPLv2 code into a project without providing the Source Code (i.e. no secret proprietary code).
If you want to make secret code, you are supposed to use a different license (people are always arguing about this on ZDNet).
I don't know what CITRIX is based on, or how it has been created and licensed.
You can charge for any software you make using GPLv2, as long as the Source Code is freely available.
Apple OS X is based on BSD (no GPLv2 lawsuit there).
I hope the case does get thrown out, because then it will be "open season" on all software code, at least in Germany, if not all of Europe (i.e. software licenses are unenforceable).Will OS X's Unix roots help Apple grow? - CNET NewsMac OS X, the first major overhaul of Apple's operating system since its 1984 introduction, is based on BSD Unix, a popular variant of Unix. Apple in late March released Mac OS X at retail and on Monday said the OS would ship on all new Macs.