SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [SLUG] Company rebranding FOSS and selling it
- To: Benno <benjl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [SLUG] Company rebranding FOSS and selling it
- From: Jeff Grima <jeffgrima@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:18:22 +1000
- Cc: slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
I am doing some further investigation into this,
What are the things to look for?
So far I am looking for;
The removal of copyright/copyleft text
Changes to the code and selling it without providing source
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 19:13 +1000, Benno wrote:
> On Tue Jul 26, 2005 at 18:34:26 +1000, James Purser wrote:
> >On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 17:53 +1000, Jeff Grima wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >> This is my first post. I hope this is a good question.
> >> There is a business in Sydney that is re-branding SME (contribs.org aka
> >> e-smith) and claiming it as there own.
> >> What (if any) is the best course of action to take against this company?
> >> A bit more information.
> >> This company sells pre-installed SMEserver linux boxes and sells
> >> support.
> >> I know that is not a crime
> >> and i know rebranding some FOSS software isnt a crime also
> >> but the bad part is that they claim they developed the software inhouse.
> >> They prey on the NOT "linux-savvy" and their "ignorance" to the
> >> technology.
> >> They also do a very poor job of supporting the product.
> >> I am not sure of the appropriateness of posting the companies details
> >> here but I will do so if enough people think it is appropriate.
> >> Also I have alot more information regarding there services.
> >> Thanks for your time,
> >> Jeff Grima
> >It depends on what license the software was released under. If it's the
> >GPL then the company has to provide the source along with the servers as
> >well as keeping all copyright attributions.
> That is not true. It needs to make the source available to those that purchase
> the server. That is different to providing it.