Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Ubuntu Software Center is Mixing Proprietary and Free Software in a Dangerous Way

posted by n1 on Monday June 08 2015, @03:16AM   Printer-friendly
from the mix-and-match dept.

tonymercmobily writes:

I have been watching the evolution of the Ubuntu Software Center for quite a while now. I had doubts about its interface and its speed, but I liked the fact that it offered an easy, down-to-earth interface that allowed users to install software easily. However, I have to say that the way the Ubuntu Software Center has evolved is worrying me -- a lot. I am not against the idea of selling software. What I am against, is confusing proprietary software with non-proprietary software, The Ubuntu Software Center seems to be doing just that.

[ Editor's Note: The submission appears to have come directly from the author of the original article. ]
Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Ubuntu Software Center is Mixing Proprietary and Free Software in a Dangerous Way | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 49 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1, Disagree) by TLA on Monday June 08 2015, @06:59AM

    by TLA (5128) on Monday June 08 2015, @06:59AM (#193543) Journal

    No [gnu.org]. Is the short answer. You must distribute the source whether or not you also distribute the binary.

    --
    Excuse me, I think I need to reboot my horse. - NCommander
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   -1  
       Overrated=1, Disagree=3, Total=4
    Extra 'Disagree' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   1  

  • (Score: 2) by jasassin on Monday June 08 2015, @08:04AM

    by jasassin (3566) <jasassin@gmail.com> on Monday June 08 2015, @08:04AM (#193562) Homepage Journal

    Can I release a modified version of a GPL-covered program in binary form only? (#ModifiedJustBinary)
    No. The whole point of the GPL is that all modified versions must be free software—which means, in particular, that the source code of the modified version is available to the users.

    I think we are having a failure to communicate. I am asking if I write my own hello world program in C with whatever new idea also, and compile it under Linux using GCC can I sell the binary and not give out the source?

    --
    jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A

    • (Score: 2) by TLA on Monday June 08 2015, @12:59PM

      by TLA (5128) on Monday June 08 2015, @12:59PM (#193620) Journal

      my bad, it was Dark O'Clock and I was misreading due exhaustion.

      --
      Excuse me, I think I need to reboot my horse. - NCommander

  • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Monday June 08 2015, @08:11AM

    by TheRaven (270) on Monday June 08 2015, @08:11AM (#193564) Journal
    Wrong. The GCC license include an explicit run-time exemption. You are free to distribute the run-time components of GCC (any code that the compiler generates that inserts code that is part of the compiler, and anything like the softfloat emulation routines) in a binary under any license. The page you link to would only be relevant if he were asking if he could distribute a modified GCC binary only.
    --
    sudo mod me up

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday June 08 2015, @08:17AM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Monday June 08 2015, @08:17AM (#193566) Journal

    Well first, C is just a language so it's use neither here nor there with respect to the GPL. Your own C code can be closed, open, or whatever you choose.

    As for GCC, it's not quite so cut and dried as you make it sound: http://www.sitepoint.com/public-license-explained/ [sitepoint.com] (nice link from the comments here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2080588/can-i-legally-incorporate-gpl-software-in-a-proprietary-closed-source-web-app [stackoverflow.com] ) The discussion here is good too: https://lwn.net/Articles/583622/ [lwn.net] You do have to be careful however, not to integrate GPL software into your program when using GCC (LGPL however solves the problem and does not invoke the GPL).

    Finally, you only have to release the source IF you distribute the code. If you make some changes to GPL'ed software and never distribute that software, you can keep those changes to yourself for all eternity.

    Going back to GCC, imagine you wrote a novel using emacs -- do you really think that would mean you have to release the book free because of emacs? How about movie special effects done in Blender? It's GPL'ed -- did we all get free Spiderman-2 tickets?