#31 From: Herwig Bauernfeind <herwig.bauernfeind@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:50 pm
Subject: Re: where is the crew? taxwarriorfr...
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Hi,
perhaps could someone of the crew bring light into the whole story?
where is the crew? how many?
tell us the story (not _a_ story, but _the_ story)!
Herwig
--
+---------------------------------------------------
| Mag. Herwig Bauernfeind - Dfb. J.Bfd. - Accountant
| Martin-Luther-Str.12, A-9300 St.Veit/Glan, Austria
| Telefon: ++43 4212 2028 Telefax: ++43 4212 2028 76
| herwig.bauernfeind@... - Fidonet: 2:313/41.5
Part 2 - Feb 19 2002
Re: Part 2
#32 From: Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 7:32 pm
Subject: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! krissteenhaut
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
JMA schreef:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:59:28 +0100, Kris Steenhaut wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >JMA schreef:
> >
> >> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:46:56 -0000, achimha wrote:
> >>
> >> If your developer has a solution why have I never heard about it ???
> >Quite right!
> >
> >And talking about stealing, if you throw something away then you can't accuse
> >anybody then for using it and using it as his property. Rex nullius. I know
> >"Rex nullius" is quite another matter in Anglo-Saksian countries, but that's
> >not of our concern.
> >
> Kris, I remember your discussions from the ecom list.
>
> Nothing is illegal until its proven by a court of law that it is.
Right indeed.
>
> If I steal something but dont get convicted in court did I then steal ??
>
As I told before, if you are saying yourself you are stealing, courts will
accept that
as the prove per excellence.
If you are saying it yourself, there is no discussion about, isn't it?
And if you don't, nobody can talk about stealing and thieves *after* courts have
ruled
that out. Before opponents only can speak about the alleged thief(s) and alleged
theft.
>
> Also, I'm unsure if it would apply to "leaked" stuff (assuming Achim is
correct)
> but in may country it is not illegal to make a copy of a music or software CD
> to a friend. Moreover its quite unproven how a copy of a copy would be judged.
>
Don't mangle different things as copyrights, protected trademarks and patents.
Fabricating a new kernel could be an infringement of existent patent protected
rights
for instance; but this matter is not related at all to copyrighting.
To repeat myself: as long Trinitron was patent protected, nobody was allowed to
*fabricate* grid based monitors. Now the patent has expired, everybody is
entitled to
fabricate aperture grid monitors. But you can't call them Trinitron monitors, as
"Trinitron" is a protected trade mark.
>
> Also, if there is a leak (again assuming Achim is correct) the real crook is
the
> person that leaks the source.
Assuming he wasn't entitled to leak of course.
> Its now up to the plaintif to prove that a) the code
> was leaked by someone that was not allowed to do it and b) that the person
that
> got the code was aware that the leak was not allowed.
>
We have to have a plaintiff in the 1st place of course.
>
> Also, and this is interesting, Achim said he know what it was since he said
> "I know its from the leaked code". This means that he most likely have seen
that
> allegded stolen code or might even posses it.
>
As you put it rightly "alleged". And even stronger, you only can speak about
"alleged
theft" unless you are going to court. (Not sure how that is in Anglo-Saksian
countries).
> But, lets drop this. Gimmie a opensource project that contains people that is
> goint to work and not just talk - And I'll support it all I can.
>
Quite right.
--
Groeten uit Gent,
Kris
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 7:32 pm
Subject: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! krissteenhaut
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
JMA schreef:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:59:28 +0100, Kris Steenhaut wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >JMA schreef:
> >
> >> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:46:56 -0000, achimha wrote:
> >>
> >> If your developer has a solution why have I never heard about it ???
> >Quite right!
> >
> >And talking about stealing, if you throw something away then you can't accuse
> >anybody then for using it and using it as his property. Rex nullius. I know
> >"Rex nullius" is quite another matter in Anglo-Saksian countries, but that's
> >not of our concern.
> >
> Kris, I remember your discussions from the ecom list.
>
> Nothing is illegal until its proven by a court of law that it is.
Right indeed.
>
> If I steal something but dont get convicted in court did I then steal ??
>
As I told before, if you are saying yourself you are stealing, courts will
accept that
as the prove per excellence.
If you are saying it yourself, there is no discussion about, isn't it?
And if you don't, nobody can talk about stealing and thieves *after* courts have
ruled
that out. Before opponents only can speak about the alleged thief(s) and alleged
theft.
>
> Also, I'm unsure if it would apply to "leaked" stuff (assuming Achim is
correct)
> but in may country it is not illegal to make a copy of a music or software CD
> to a friend. Moreover its quite unproven how a copy of a copy would be judged.
>
Don't mangle different things as copyrights, protected trademarks and patents.
Fabricating a new kernel could be an infringement of existent patent protected
rights
for instance; but this matter is not related at all to copyrighting.
To repeat myself: as long Trinitron was patent protected, nobody was allowed to
*fabricate* grid based monitors. Now the patent has expired, everybody is
entitled to
fabricate aperture grid monitors. But you can't call them Trinitron monitors, as
"Trinitron" is a protected trade mark.
>
> Also, if there is a leak (again assuming Achim is correct) the real crook is
the
> person that leaks the source.
Assuming he wasn't entitled to leak of course.
> Its now up to the plaintif to prove that a) the code
> was leaked by someone that was not allowed to do it and b) that the person
that
> got the code was aware that the leak was not allowed.
>
We have to have a plaintiff in the 1st place of course.
>
> Also, and this is interesting, Achim said he know what it was since he said
> "I know its from the leaked code". This means that he most likely have seen
that
> allegded stolen code or might even posses it.
>
As you put it rightly "alleged". And even stronger, you only can speak about
"alleged
theft" unless you are going to court. (Not sure how that is in Anglo-Saksian
countries).
> But, lets drop this. Gimmie a opensource project that contains people that is
> goint to work and not just talk - And I'll support it all I can.
>
Quite right.
--
Groeten uit Gent,
Kris
Re: Part 2
#33 From: Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 7:36 pm
Subject: Re: New License krissteenhaut
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
JMA schreef:
>
> But thats not the point, I want to participate in a project that
> does an opensource OS/2. This release and this team may
Allow me to remind:
opensource with the same qualities as OS/2 (*)
(*) OS2 is a protected trade mark by IBM.
--
Groeten uit Gent,
Kris
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 7:36 pm
Subject: Re: New License krissteenhaut
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
JMA schreef:
>
> But thats not the point, I want to participate in a project that
> does an opensource OS/2. This release and this team may
Allow me to remind:
opensource with the same qualities as OS/2 (*)
(*) OS2 is a protected trade mark by IBM.
--
Groeten uit Gent,
Kris
Re: Part 2
#34 From: "atomic_frogii" <atomic_frogii@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 8:59 pm
Subject: So what's the plan?... atomic_frogii
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
So, many people agree that this is illegal (and some do not). I think
if there is this much debate, then it is probably not the right path
to take.
If one wants to make use of this source, you need 2 teams, isolated
from each other. Team 1 may have the leaked source and reports to Team
2 the API calls and description of it's function, but can give nothing
else. This will be tricky, because you must document absolutely that
no leak ever occured between Team 1 and Team 2.
On the other hand, maybe there is an easier way to duplicate OS/2.
Don't start the kernel from scratch, there are plenty of existing
kernels that will boot on i386 (or maybe we do not even need i386).
Look what Apple has done with the Mach? kernel. And it still retains
backward compatibility with MacOS9. (Darwin is open-source, btw. If
you can build on top of that on a PowerPC machine....)
All you need is a booting kernel, then you can build whatever you want
around it that just responds to OS/2's API calls. It doesn't even have
to look the same or even necessarily behave exactly the same. It just
needs to do something once it has received a call.
Yes, I am all talk, but maybe people with greater technical skill will
get ideas from this. I think this is lot of work, but just need to
slog through it as opposed to more challenging technical details like
how to build a kernel from scratch.
Isaac
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 8:59 pm
Subject: So what's the plan?... atomic_frogii
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
So, many people agree that this is illegal (and some do not). I think
if there is this much debate, then it is probably not the right path
to take.
If one wants to make use of this source, you need 2 teams, isolated
from each other. Team 1 may have the leaked source and reports to Team
2 the API calls and description of it's function, but can give nothing
else. This will be tricky, because you must document absolutely that
no leak ever occured between Team 1 and Team 2.
On the other hand, maybe there is an easier way to duplicate OS/2.
Don't start the kernel from scratch, there are plenty of existing
kernels that will boot on i386 (or maybe we do not even need i386).
Look what Apple has done with the Mach? kernel. And it still retains
backward compatibility with MacOS9. (Darwin is open-source, btw. If
you can build on top of that on a PowerPC machine....)
All you need is a booting kernel, then you can build whatever you want
around it that just responds to OS/2's API calls. It doesn't even have
to look the same or even necessarily behave exactly the same. It just
needs to do something once it has received a call.
Yes, I am all talk, but maybe people with greater technical skill will
get ideas from this. I think this is lot of work, but just need to
slog through it as opposed to more challenging technical details like
how to build a kernel from scratch.
Isaac
Re: Part 2
#35 From: "c0deab1e" <rhs@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 9:11 pm
Subject: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! c0deab1e
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
--- In osFree@y..., "JMA" <mail@j...> wrote:
> If we believe Achim fully and the developers (I have
> to repeat, I'm NOT one of the developers) picked up
> leaked code what money would they rob IBM of.
>
They are _not_ developers, they are just compiler runners. I thought I
have found something really interesting and useful here but had
mistaken. Too sad osFree appears to be only a dumb and silly rip.
--
c0deab1e
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 9:11 pm
Subject: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! c0deab1e
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
--- In osFree@y..., "JMA" <mail@j...> wrote:
> If we believe Achim fully and the developers (I have
> to repeat, I'm NOT one of the developers) picked up
> leaked code what money would they rob IBM of.
>
They are _not_ developers, they are just compiler runners. I thought I
have found something really interesting and useful here but had
mistaken. Too sad osFree appears to be only a dumb and silly rip.
--
c0deab1e
Re: Part 2
#36 From: "pinoozzyid" <pinoozzyid@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 9:20 pm
Subject: Leaked sources pinoozzyid
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Somebody said that this work was based on leaked sources from the
Merlin era, and in fact that could be true (sources please). This is a
bomb to the small divided OS/2 community and comes from nowhere.
If this is a true work (very much in doubt), the let's get to work to
improve what we know we are missing in OS/2, let's join forces with
Serenity and bring Warp into a new era where IBM doesn't play a role,
let's create a page like OpenBEOS and set up a CVS server with the
sources..., no?, I didn't think so.
Microsoft Windows sources were leaked sometime ago but no one would go
even close to it, because it would main so much s... that noone dares.
On the other hand BeOS sources were leaked too, last month, together
with a 5.1 release, but nobody (except BeOS followers) cares, because
it's a system that was officially declared dead (not even PALM cares).
Here we have a middle situation. True 99.9% of the world doesn't even
care about OS/2, but the fact that IBM still sells it and support it
in one form or another complicate things for a system based on leaked
sources.
It could be based on the Merlin sources but this are at least 90% the
same that MCP2 (remember the M stands for Merlin). The main changes
are those of the support of the new file system and it's interfaces,
that were developed to support another feature that never came to be
(so far at least).
I would love to be this what it claims to be, I would support it right
away and possibly help too. Maybe IBM doesn't care untill DB2 can be
run on top of it, maybe they won't even bother since they are too busy
trying to position WebSphere against .NET
For now I'm happy to see this release and count me in for any help
Leonardo Pino
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 9:20 pm
Subject: Leaked sources pinoozzyid
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Somebody said that this work was based on leaked sources from the
Merlin era, and in fact that could be true (sources please). This is a
bomb to the small divided OS/2 community and comes from nowhere.
If this is a true work (very much in doubt), the let's get to work to
improve what we know we are missing in OS/2, let's join forces with
Serenity and bring Warp into a new era where IBM doesn't play a role,
let's create a page like OpenBEOS and set up a CVS server with the
sources..., no?, I didn't think so.
Microsoft Windows sources were leaked sometime ago but no one would go
even close to it, because it would main so much s... that noone dares.
On the other hand BeOS sources were leaked too, last month, together
with a 5.1 release, but nobody (except BeOS followers) cares, because
it's a system that was officially declared dead (not even PALM cares).
Here we have a middle situation. True 99.9% of the world doesn't even
care about OS/2, but the fact that IBM still sells it and support it
in one form or another complicate things for a system based on leaked
sources.
It could be based on the Merlin sources but this are at least 90% the
same that MCP2 (remember the M stands for Merlin). The main changes
are those of the support of the new file system and it's interfaces,
that were developed to support another feature that never came to be
(so far at least).
I would love to be this what it claims to be, I would support it right
away and possibly help too. Maybe IBM doesn't care untill DB2 can be
run on top of it, maybe they won't even bother since they are too busy
trying to position WebSphere against .NET
For now I'm happy to see this release and count me in for any help
Leonardo Pino
Re: Part 2
#37 From: "Adrian Gschwend" <ktk@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 9:26 pm
Subject: Re: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! netlabsorg
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:11:01 -0000, c0deab1e wrote:
>They are _not_ developers, they are just compiler runners. I thought I
>have found something really interesting and useful here but had
>mistaken. Too sad osFree appears to be only a dumb and silly rip.
I will post my comments about OSFree tomorrow. Even if I can't accept
the current binary I wouldn't call it "dumb and silly rip" because you
still need to be a programmer to get that stuff working.
more later
cu
Adrian
--
Adrian Gschwend
@ OS/2 Netlabs
ICQ: 22419590
ktk@...
-------
The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
http://www.netlabs.org
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 9:26 pm
Subject: Re: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! netlabsorg
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:11:01 -0000, c0deab1e wrote:
>They are _not_ developers, they are just compiler runners. I thought I
>have found something really interesting and useful here but had
>mistaken. Too sad osFree appears to be only a dumb and silly rip.
I will post my comments about OSFree tomorrow. Even if I can't accept
the current binary I wouldn't call it "dumb and silly rip" because you
still need to be a programmer to get that stuff working.
more later
cu
Adrian
--
Adrian Gschwend
@ OS/2 Netlabs
ICQ: 22419590
ktk@...
-------
The OS/2 OpenSource Project:
http://www.netlabs.org
Re: Part 2
#38 From: Stepan Kazakov <madded@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 6:32 am
Subject: Re: So what's the plan?... zuko18ru
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
atomic_frogii wrote:
> On the other hand, maybe there is an easier way to duplicate OS/2.
> Don't start the kernel from scratch, there are plenty of existing
> kernels that will boot on i386 (or maybe we do not even need i386).
> Look what Apple has done with the Mach? kernel. And it still retains
> backward compatibility with MacOS9. (Darwin is open-source, btw. If
> you can build on top of that on a PowerPC machine....)
> All you need is a booting kernel, then you can build whatever you want
> around it that just responds to OS/2's API calls. It doesn't even have
> to look the same or even necessarily behave exactly the same. It just
> needs to do something once it has received a call.
> Yes, I am all talk, but maybe people with greater technical skill will
> get ideas from this. I think this is lot of work, but just need to
> slog through it as opposed to more challenging technical details like
> how to build a kernel from scratch.
anyway: os2 kernel must be redesigned and totally rewritten, and all
internal 16bit OLD *censor* stuff must be removed..
only API for drivers & ring3 apps must be the same, for compatibility issues..
also the problem will be in Dos support (anybody need it? )
and all this a HUGE work.
i dont think what opensource & enthusiasm may help in this..
--
madded. [Red Hot Chili Hackers]
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 6:32 am
Subject: Re: So what's the plan?... zuko18ru
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
atomic_frogii wrote:
> On the other hand, maybe there is an easier way to duplicate OS/2.
> Don't start the kernel from scratch, there are plenty of existing
> kernels that will boot on i386 (or maybe we do not even need i386).
> Look what Apple has done with the Mach? kernel. And it still retains
> backward compatibility with MacOS9. (Darwin is open-source, btw. If
> you can build on top of that on a PowerPC machine....)
> All you need is a booting kernel, then you can build whatever you want
> around it that just responds to OS/2's API calls. It doesn't even have
> to look the same or even necessarily behave exactly the same. It just
> needs to do something once it has received a call.
> Yes, I am all talk, but maybe people with greater technical skill will
> get ideas from this. I think this is lot of work, but just need to
> slog through it as opposed to more challenging technical details like
> how to build a kernel from scratch.
anyway: os2 kernel must be redesigned and totally rewritten, and all
internal 16bit OLD *censor* stuff must be removed..
only API for drivers & ring3 apps must be the same, for compatibility issues..
also the problem will be in Dos support (anybody need it? )
and all this a HUGE work.
i dont think what opensource & enthusiasm may help in this..
--
madded. [Red Hot Chili Hackers]
Re: Part 2
#39 From: "Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2)" <bart2@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 11:39 pm
Subject: Re: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:11:01 -0000, c0deab1e wrote:
>They are _not_ developers, they are just compiler runners. I thought I
>have found something really interesting and useful here but had
>mistaken. Too sad osFree appears to be only a dumb and silly rip.
thank you for your participation - now you can unsubscribe :>
sorry but I get nervous.... something finally happens and most of you.... or
maybe you're
already writing to this group from Win* / Linux box?
One person already noticed that we're in similar situation to BeOS folks - the
difference
is that they don't care whenever the code comes from, they get it, and work -
just to
save what they love (and that's not true Palm don't care, several Be-related
sites that
had served the code has been shut down after this leakege). More, there are
plenty of
ex-Be'ers that joined OpenBe effort and helping... but we... "no this is
probably not quite
legal.. so I won;t bother, i'll better go and instal new linux kernel..." damn!
Don't you
care? I do, and I will do everything to help them (osFree team, if they want me
to) - there
is a chance, and we should take it.
And if Achim has something to show (ukernel OS/2), please show us, I guess that
if this
is a better way to follow, most will join you...
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 11:39 pm
Subject: Re: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:11:01 -0000, c0deab1e wrote:
>They are _not_ developers, they are just compiler runners. I thought I
>have found something really interesting and useful here but had
>mistaken. Too sad osFree appears to be only a dumb and silly rip.
thank you for your participation - now you can unsubscribe :>
sorry but I get nervous.... something finally happens and most of you.... or
maybe you're
already writing to this group from Win* / Linux box?
One person already noticed that we're in similar situation to BeOS folks - the
difference
is that they don't care whenever the code comes from, they get it, and work -
just to
save what they love (and that's not true Palm don't care, several Be-related
sites that
had served the code has been shut down after this leakege). More, there are
plenty of
ex-Be'ers that joined OpenBe effort and helping... but we... "no this is
probably not quite
legal.. so I won;t bother, i'll better go and instal new linux kernel..." damn!
Don't you
care? I do, and I will do everything to help them (osFree team, if they want me
to) - there
is a chance, and we should take it.
And if Achim has something to show (ukernel OS/2), please show us, I guess that
if this
is a better way to follow, most will join you...
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Re: Part 2
#40 From: "Perry Werneck" <perry.werneck@...>
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 11:48 pm
Subject: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! perrywerneck
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Hi,
> should be done differently. A developer of ours has worked on a
> microkernel architecture with an OS/2 server (and Linux personality)
What did you mean with "Linux personality"?
> for research purposes. You should rather go into this direction...
I agree about this. *If* the idea is to wrote a real free OS based on OS/2 the
best way is writing a
brand new kernel supporting the same APIs of the original one and, maybee, some
new ones. (-:
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 11:48 pm
Subject: Re: 100% stolen - no doubt! perrywerneck
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Hi,
> should be done differently. A developer of ours has worked on a
> microkernel architecture with an OS/2 server (and Linux personality)
What did you mean with "Linux personality"?
> for research purposes. You should rather go into this direction...
I agree about this. *If* the idea is to wrote a real free OS based on OS/2 the
best way is writing a
brand new kernel supporting the same APIs of the original one and, maybee, some
new ones. (-: