ru.linux

 
 - RU.LINUX ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 From : Sergey Lentsov                       2:4615/71.10   03 Mar 2002  15:38:02
 To : All
 Subject : URL: http://www.lwn.net/2002/0228/
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 

    [1][LWN Logo] [No ads right now]
    [LWN.net]
 
              Bringing you the latest news from the Linux World.
    Dedicated to keeping Linux users up-to-date, with concise news for all
                                  interests
 
    Sections:
     Main page
     [2]Security
     [3]Kernel
     [4]Distributions
     [5]Development
     [6]Commerce
     [7]Linux in the news
     [8]Announcements
     [9]Letters
    [10]All in one big page
 
    Other LWN stuff:
     [11]Daily Updates
     [12]Calendar
     [13]Linux Stocks Page
     [14]Book reviews
     [15]Penguin Gallery
 
     [16]Archives/search
     [17]Use LWN headlines
     [18]Contact us
 
    Recent features:
    - [19]2001 Timeline
    - [20]O'Reilly Open Source Conference
    - [21]OLS 2001
    - [22]Gael Duval
    - [23]Kernel Summit
    - [24]Singapore Linux Conference
    - [25]djbdns
 
    Here is the [26]permanent site for this page.
 
    See also: [27]last week's LWN.
 
 Leading items and editorials
 
    No more free StarOffice downloads. Linux users have long been
    accustomed to being able to download the StarOffice suite for free. It
    is one of the best deals out there: a complex, highly functional
    office suite which can be had for the price of a download. Seemingly,
    the deal was a little too good; the word has now slipped out that
    StarOffice 6.0 will be a proprietary product. At least for some
    operating systems; the Solaris version will remain free (of charge).
 
    Why might Sun be doing this? Turning StarOffice into a proprietary
    product will certainly reduce its use on Linux systems. In the absence
    of a definitive word from Sun, one can only go looking for possible
    motives, such as:
      * The StarOffice development team is expensive, and Sun would like
        to earn enough money from their work to pay their keep.
      * Pointy-haired bosses might actually take the product more
        seriously if they have to pay for it. Turning StarOffice into a
        commercial product could, conceivably, increase its penetration
        into places where Sun actually wants to go.
      * By all appearances, Sun will be coming out with its own Linux
        distribution (though the company has refused to comment to us on
        that topic). A Sun-branded Linux would offer a distinct value
        above other distributions if it were the only one which came with
        a bundled version of StarOffice.
 
    Then again, perhaps Sun just remains hostile to the idea of free
    software. Those days, however, are probably (hopefully) past.
 
    It will be interesting to see how this all turns out. If Sun is able
    to turn StarOffice into a successful product, that is likely to be
    good for Linux in the long run. That is a big "if," however; if your
    name is not Microsoft, the office suite business is not a very fun
    place to be. Sun's success there is far from guaranteed.
 
    The Linux community, in any case, can be calm about this move. After
    all, StarOffice never was free software, even if one did not have to
    pay for it. But it's based on [28]OpenOffice, which, thanks to Sun, is
    free software. OpenOffice does most of what StarOffice does (see
    [29]the OpenOffice FAQ for a list of differences), and the source is
    out there. If a commercial StarOffice helps to support the development
    of OpenOffice, it is hard to argue that the Linux community has lost
    anything from this move.
 
    [Editor's note: the original title of this article ("StarOffice goes
    proprietary") was clearly misleading, generated a lot of mail, and has
    been changed. We apologize for any confusion].
 
    The Progress (NuSphere)/MySQL AB preliminary hearing was still
    unresolved as of this writing. This is a legal case that is worth
    watching; it is, perhaps, the first time that the GPL will be tested
    in court.
 
    The basics of the case are relatively straightforward. NuSphere
    implemented its "Gemini" storage manager for MySQL, and shipped a
    binary product that included that code. Since MySQL is licensed under
    the GPL, NuSphere was bound by the license to ship the source for its
    modifications. The source for Gemini, however, was long in coming.
 
    NuSphere has issued [30]a press release denying any violation of the
    GPL took place:
 
      The FSF contends that NuSphere violated the GPL by simply linking
      proprietary software to the MySQL system using a public API. MySQL
      AB is interpreting the GPL so broadly that any commercial software
      that comes into contact with free software must also become free..
 
    MySQL AB does indeed [31]take a broad view of the GPL - code which
    speaks to the MySQL daemon over a network connection can deemed to be
    "linked" and thus fall under the GPL. In the Gemini case, however,
    things are simpler: the Gemini storage manager was staticly linked
    into the MySQL daemon itself. This is exactly the sort of situation
    the GPL was written to cover; if it does not apply here then its
    restrictions on derived works are weak indeed. It will be interesting
    to see what the court says, but this case looks clear to most
    observers.
 
    Of course, the Gemini source has been available for some time;
    NuSphere's current products are no longer in violation. Unfortunately
    for NuSphere, the GPL states that, once a violation occurs, all rights
    to use the software are terminated. MySQL AB is trying to use that
    term to prevent NuSphere from distributing MySQL at all, even though
    it is currently in compliance. That is a departure from previous GPL
    enforcement efforts; usually, once a problem has been resolved, the
    violator is "forgiven" and may continue to distribute the software.
    The normal purpose, after all, is to bring about compliance with the
    license. The first goal is not usually punishment of the violator.
 
    This case is clearly different. NuSphere makes its living by selling
    value-added versions of MySQL (and associated services). By trying to
    deprive NuSphere of the right to distribute the system, even after the
    GPL violation has been remedied, MySQL AB is going for blood: NuSphere
    could well be driven out of business.
 
    Why is MySQL AB taking this approach? There has been bad blood between
    the two companies for some time, and lawsuits have been filed in both
    directions. The full details of the dispute between the two have never
    been made public; there is likely far more going on than most of us
    are aware of. The GPL enforcement looks like just another tactic
    employed by MySQL AB in this disagreement. In other words, we're
    seeing the public part of an unpleasant, private, and unrelated (to
    the GPL) fight between two corporations. It's too bad they had to drag
    the GPL into it.
 
    (See also: [32]the FSF's press release on Eben Moglen's participation
    in the trial, [33]his affidavit explaining in detail why NuSphere
    should lose its right to distribute MySQL, and [34]this brief report
    from the preliminary hearing suggesting that a GPL-based injunction
    would not be issued at this time).
 
    Monitoring the chilling effects. The Electronic Frontier Foundation,
    along with Internet law clinics at Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, and
    San Francisco have [35]announced the launch of a new site at
    [36]ChillingEffects.org. This site seeks to encourage freedom of
    expression on the Internet with legal information on (U.S.)
    intellectual property laws and First Amendment rights. Topics covered
    include the rights of authors of "fan fiction," anonymous posting,
    linking, and, of course, the DMCA.
 
    The real core of the site, however, appears to be an archive of "cease
    and desist" letters that have been published by their recipients. This
    is a highly worthwhile endeavor; as the number of these letters grows,
    this archive will provide a picture of the real cost of the DMCA and
    other problematic intellectual property laws. That can only help in
    the battle to roll back those laws, and to prevent the passage of even
    more ill-advised legislation (such as the SSSCA). Of course, seeing
    how willing some people are to call out the lawyers and shut down
    sites they don't like could have a chilling effect of its own...
 
    Speaking of the SSSCA, it's worth taking a look at [37]this column by
    Jack Valenti, CEO of the MPAA. This, of course, is the guy who claimed
    that the video cassette recorder "is to the American film producer and
    the American public as the Boston Strangler is to the woman alone."
    He's worried about Internet downloads of films, of course. His
    solution?
 
      Simply put, in order to transport movies as agreed to by the
      consumer on a rent, buy or pay-per-view basis with heightened
      security, computers and video devices must be prepared to react to
      instructions embedded in the film.
 
    In other words, the film industry wants to be able to program our
    computers for us to implement their copyright protection schemes. One
    imagines that the industry will not react well to those of us who
    decide to reprogram our systems to work the way we want. Given that
    new hearings on digital content protection are to be held on
    February 28 (with our friend Mr. Valenti testifying), the threat of
    new, hostile legislation is real.
 
    This approach is hostile, at its core, to the fundamental ideas behind
    free software. The MPAA knows how our hardware and software should
    work, and is prepared to use the legal system to ensure computers work
    that way. It is your hardware, but it is controlled by somebody else.
    This does not look like a desirable future to those of us who are
    concerned about freedom, fair use rights, security, privacy, or any of
    a number of other issues.
 
    (See also: [38]this Bugtraq posting on severe privacy problems with
    the Microsoft Windows Media Player.)
 
    W3C RAND licensing followup. The W3C has issued [39]a press release
    describing its now draft patent policy. The new policy was examined in
    detail [40]back in January; we'll not repeat that discussion now. If
    anything, the policy has tipped ever more strongly against patented
    technology: "Working Group Participants must now commit to
    Royalty-Free Licensing." Once again, congratulations are due to the
    community: we won this one.
 
    Inside this LWN.net weekly edition:
      * [41]Security: Common security vulnerability naming; squid
        problems.
      * [42]Kernel: Process migration; Doing BK penguin style.
      * [43]Distributions: Rock Linux; Embedded Distributions and new
        Intel processors.
      * [44]Development: Omni 0.6.0, Alsa 0.9.0b12, Linux H.A. report,
        Ghostscript 6.53, Zope 2.5.1b1, Gnome 2.0 beta, AbiWord 0.99.2,
        gphoto 2.0, GCC 3.0.4, TinyCOBOL 0.5.7.
      * [45]Commerce: Linux International starts telecom marketing
        initiative; EU lets Microsoft write its Patent Directive.
      * [46]Letters: Racism and free software; Debian Testing; CML2.
 
    ...plus the usual array of reports, updates, and announcements.
 
    This Week's LWN was brought to you by:
      * [47]Jonathan Corbet, Executive Editor
 
    February 28, 2002
                                                        [48]Next: Security
 
    [49]Eklektix, Inc. Linux powered! Copyright Л 2002 [50]Eklektix, Inc.,
    all rights reserved
    Linux (R) is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds
 
 References
 
    1. http://lwn.net/
    2. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/security.php3
    3. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/kernel.php3
    4. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/dists.php3
    5. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/devel.php3
    6. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/commerce.php3
    7. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/press.php3
    8. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/announce.php3
    9. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/letters.php3
   10. http://lwn.net//2002/0228/bigpage.php3
   11. http://lwn.net/daily/
   12. http://linuxcalendar.com/
   13. http://lwn.net/stocks/
   14. http://lwn.net/Reviews/
   15. http://lwn.net/Gallery/
   16. http://lwn.net/archives/
   17. http://lwn.net/op/headlines.phtml
   18. http://lwn.net/op/Contact.html
   19. http://lwn.net/2001/features/Timeline/
   20. http://lwn.net/2001/features/oreilly2001/
   21. http://lwn.net/2001/features/OLS/
   22. http://lwn.net/2001/features/MandrakeSoft.php3
   23. http://lwn.net/2001/features/KernelSummit/
   24. http://lwn.net/2001/features/Singapore
   25. http://lwn.net/2001/features/djbdns.php3
   26. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/
   27. http://lwn.net/2002/0221/
   28. http://www.openoffice.org/
   29. http://www.openoffice.org/FAQs/mostfaqs.html#7
   30. http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.022702/220582261
   31. http://www.mysql.com/support/arrangements.html
   32. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/a/fsf-mysql.php3
   33. http://www.fsf.org/press/mysql-affidavit.html
   34. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/a/mysql-nusphere.php3
   35. http://www.chillingeffects.org/weather.cgi?WeatherID=2
   36. http://www.chillingeffects.org/
   37. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62085-2002Feb24.html
   38. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/a/ms-dvd.php3
   39. http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.022602/220570283
   40. http://lwn.net/2002/0131/
   41. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/security.php3
   42. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/kernel.php3
   43. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/dists.php3
   44. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/devel.php3
   45. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/commerce.php3
   46. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/letters.php3
   47. mailto:lwn@lwn.net
   48. http://lwn.net/2002/0228/security.php3
   49. http://www.eklektix.com/
   50. http://www.eklektix.com/
 
 --- ifmail v.2.14.os7-aks1
  * Origin: Unknown (2:4615/71.10@fidonet)
 
 

Вернуться к списку тем, сортированных по: возрастание даты  уменьшение даты  тема  автор