[ubuntu-my] First Malaysian OS?

[Mohammad Hafiz mypapit (9W2WTF)]

ok ok cool down,

rather than pissing and shitting about policies, rules and law, GPL, LGPL,
WTFPL...

I'm gonna ask you guys this --  If you think this company/group/whatever
(My1OS or FIMOS) is violating the law, your conscience or principles or even
disturb your mental wellness...

then the most obvious question to ask, is *what* are you going to do about
it?

- is it just by pissing, shitting and talking around the mailing list is the
answer? do you even have the right to take action against this group/company
under the Copyright Law?

yeah right...figure that out instead of taking your time pointing to various
software license clause and trying to look smart.









On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:27 AM, zarul shahrin <zarulshahrin at gmail.com>wrote:

> Let me make your life easier since you're attacking me without fully
> understand my post or just don't bother to scroll up and read;
>
> Zarul Shahrin:
>
> " IF I can get access to a copy"
>
> Najmi:
>
> "it's commercial, you've to buy them."
>
> Zarul Shahrin:
>
>  it's commercial, you've to buy them.
>>
>
>   This is the problem.  No Understanding of GPL whatsoever.
>
> From GPL FAQ:
>
> Does the GPL allow me to require that anyone who receives the software must
> pay me a fee and/or notify me?
> No. In fact, a requirement like that would make the program non-free. If
> people have to pay when they get a copy of a program, or if they have to
> notify anyone in particular, then the program is not free. See the
> definition of free software.
>
> The GPL is a free software license, and therefore it permits people to use
> and even redistribute the software without being required to pay anyone a
> fee for doing so.
>
> ----
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Chow Loong Jin <hyperair at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 10,March,2011 11:02 AM, zarul shahrin wrote:
>> > I didn't say anything about them selling it, but more about
>> > its availability.  If they can't even follow something as simple as
>> that, I
>> > wonder what else have been breached.
>> >
>>
>> Availability? According to the GPL, you only need to make the source code
>> available after selling your clients the binaries. And you need to allow
>> your
>> clients to do whatever they want with the binaries/source code.
>>
>> Like I said, what they are doing is very similar to what RedHat is doing.
>> There
>> are no legal issues here, only perhaps ethical issues, but even that is
>> debatable.
>>
>> Their web site does not claim that you cannot make copies or redistribute
>> the
>> distribution after buying it from them. But neither are they obliged
>> (legally)
>> to distribute their distribution for free either.
>>
>> Hence, if you do obtain a copy of the distribution from a third party
>> (say, for
>> free, without obtaining a license from them), that's not illegal. You just
>> won't
>> receive updates, because you're not registered with them so they won't
>> ship
>> updates to you. Simple as that.
>>
>> --
>> Kind regards,
>> Loong Jin
>>
>>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-my mailing list
> Ubuntu-my at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-my
>
>


-- 
something real at :
Blog : http://blog.mypapit.net
Website : http://mypapit.net

Yahoo ID: papit58

Codes:
http://code.google.com/u/mypapit
http://freshmeat.net/users/papit01

GPG Public Key:
mypapit_public.key<http://drop.fakap.net/files/mypapit_id_public.key.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-my/attachments/20110310/682c4153/attachment-0001.html>