Hello.
I want to share with you something...
I have just discovered that a guy has written a text editor for CP/M getting my 'te' text editor as the source.
That's ok, but... he has not respected the GPL license at all. He claims the full copyright and has changed the license for another of his own. All illegal.
Of course, in the end, it's a matter of respect about the work of other people.
And even worse, things like that make me think about if people that doesn't release the source code of your software projects are right and I'm wrong.
Thanks.
-------
https://github.com/lindehaven/CP-M/issues/1 (https://github.com/lindehaven/CP-M/issues/1)
Hello.
I'm very surprised you have written your 'le' text editor borrowing a lot of code from my 'te' text editor without respecting the GPL 'te' license and publishing 'le' under another -incompatible- license.
I will not detail here all the coincidences between my code and yours (they are a lot!), but the following will serve as an example:
Your code:
```
/* Move cursor one page down */
pageDown() {
int first, last, to;
first = edGetFirstLineNumber();
last = edGetLastLineNumber();
if (last < lp_tot - 1) {
to = first + ED_ROWS;
if (to >= lp_tot)
to = lp_tot - 1;
lp_cur = to; ed_row = ed_col = 0;
edUpdAll();
} else
toEOF();
}
```
My code:
```
/* Page down
---------
*/
LoopPgDown()
{
int first, last, to;
first = LoopFirst();
last = LoopLast();
if(last < lp_now - 1)
{
to = first + box_rows;
if(to >= lp_now)
to = lp_now - 1;
lp_cur = to; box_shr = box_shc = 0;
RefreshAll();
}
else
LoopBottom();
}
```
My 'te' text editor is licensed under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE v2 as stated in the code and in a separate text file:
> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
> Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any
> later version.
According to the license, you can modify the code and distribute it, but you must follow the license rules, including:
> 2. **You may modify** your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
> of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, **and copy and
> distribute such modifications** or work under the terms of Section 1
> above, **provided that you also meet all of these conditions**:
>
> a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
> stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
>
> b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
> whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
> part thereof, **to be licensed as a whole** at no charge to all third
> parties **under the terms of this License**.
>
> c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively
> when run, you must cause it, when started running for such
> interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an
> announcement **including an appropriate copyright notice** and a
> notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide
> a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under
> these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this
> License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but
> does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on
> the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
I formally ask you to follow the 'te' license rules and modify your code, copyright and license accordingly.
What a pity! I'm sorry to hear. It's crap that people do this. :(
It's indeed a pity, but I don't think it's worth the time and energy (or money) to go after such mediocre person.
As you said, it's a matter of respect.
Cheers, mate!
Quote from: FloppySoftware on 00:13, 14 December 17
And even worse, things like that make me think about if people that doesn't release the source code of your software projects are right and I'm wrong.
You can see it as a form of gratitude.
Sure, copying someone else's work is the sincerest form of flattery but also quite disrespectful.
It seems that he's updated the license detail on Github and given appropriate credit now...
Right, all is in order now.
But it has been necessary to ask him about it.
If not...
Thanks.
How do you even spot something like that? Not only actually finding the project, but also the incriminating code? It seems there has been an attempt at concealing it, changing the names of the variables and the text formatting.
I don't code for real myself, but most of my scripts are derived or straight up copied from stuff I found on stackoverflow and the like over decades of internet browsing. I'd have no idea how to give proper credit if I ever were to put my work online.
This is bad :(
It reminds me that guy who copied exactly my blacks Amiga 1200 badge and he is selling it to ebay...
Honestly this is probably the best possible outcome. Person violates license, is asked to fix it, and they do. Don't find reasons to stay mad.
Quote from: pelrun on 06:48, 15 December 17
Honestly this is probably the best possible outcome. Person violates license, is asked to fix it, and they do. Don't find reasons to stay mad.
Yeah agreed seems a good outcome I'm not sure everyone understands the license conditions for these open source type things.
Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk