Thanks for the very lively and interesting discussion. The OP e-mailed a few days ago asking for the source code for DosBox Turbo [google.com]. I informed him that I make available the source code to my users whom I've distributed a binary to and that the GPL specifically allows for this. I also make available the source code to the upsteam DosBox devs, and forwarded them copies not too long ago. Furthermore, I've contacted the aDosBox devs and offered to port many of my improvements into the free aDosBox software for everyone to benefit. I've never heard back from the aDosBox devs, and I am assuming it is a dead project, as there has been no activity in over a year and no response to my messages in over 4 months.
While I respect the OP's opinion that (actual price on Google play is $3.49) is too much to pay (don't forget Google takes 30% off the top), the reality is, a majority of my time is spent providing user support, fixing bugs in various Android devices that my users have, and implementing new features and suggestions from my user-base. I've amassed a collection of no less than 8 different Android devices, so that I can reproduce a wide range of reported bugs.
The OP and I may disagree on what my time is worth; however, we did have a constructive discussion about perhaps moving to a model of charging for the value add-ons (which I currently provide for free), although, I'm not sure how easy that would be within the Google Play framework. I also suggested to him that there were numerous avenues for him to obtain a copy of the binary free of charge if price was a factor (one only has to search the various Android warez sites) and that I had no problems with him going that route.
While the OP may disagree with me, I believe that being able to charge for GPL software (and comply with the GPL) allows for development of better software with features and bug fixes that would normally never occur. Believe me, it is very time-consuming to sit around for hours answering user e-mails, or spending hours to fix hard to reproduce bugs that occur only on a specific version of Android or a specific device. Few, if any people, would do that kind of tedious work for free.
The problem is one of fairness, not the amount - if you think $3.99 is fair for Yahma to charge for his efforts, why do you think it's fair that the original DOSBox developers, who contributed probably by far more work, get absolutely nothing? They must work for free, someone else earns an income off their work?
As a point of fact, the GPL does not "specifically allow[]" you to make the source code available only to users who pay for a binary version. GPLv2 offers three choices when distributing a binary work covered by its terms: 3(a) accompany the binary version with the source code; 3(b) accompany the binary version with an offer to provide the source code to anyone, at no more than your cost to distribute the source; or 3(c) -- for non-commercial redistribution of binary forms -- with the same offer that one received according to 3(b).
If someone else gets the binary from you, does not accept your offer of the source code, then technically they cannot give the binary to anyone else! Why not? Because the same rules apply to them. If THEY give the binary to someone else, they are distributing, and THEY have to provide the source code.
No quite. If they are redistributing non-commercially, they can comply with section 3c merely by passing on the original written offer from the dev/distributor (Yahma).
However, if Yahma isn't including an offer of source to his customers for them to pass on (nor is he providing the source with the binaries), then he wasn't complying with the licence for the original DOSBox source he has modified. He therefore isn't entitled to use that code to base his derived work from. (Similarly Google Play, being a dist
You sound like you are trying to be reasonable in all of this - you're trying to work with upstreams, you haven't said no to source requests, your pricing is not high etc. However there's a risk you'll run into issues:
It may be worth including the source to inside the apk - that way you can head off any requests for the source with a response that they are distributed alongside the binaries (which is close to what you want to do - distribute to those who financially contribute) and you should buy the binary
Nice, however from my reading of the GPLv2, it would seem that in order to avoid having to provide the source code to anyone who requests it from you, you need to distribute it with the binary.
My suggestion would be to add a very simple downloader to the app that will download the source code to the phone's sdcard.
What some companies do when they have to comply with the GPL, is to make their software insanely hard to compile.
That's a violation too.
"The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable."
So unless it's insanely hard to compile for y
So unless it's insanely hard to compile for you, it can't be insanely hard to compile for downstream receipients.
Sure it can. The only requirement is that downstream can compile it. If you use precompiled libs in your dev environment, but they have to compile their libs from source for a few hours on a machine with 16GB ram, then there is nothing wrong with that.
That's a GPLv3 requirement, not a GPLv2. Since most of the people who find themselves dealing w/ GPL software are in that scenario b'cos they are working w/ Linux, they follow whatever they are allowed under GPLv2.
I informed him that I make available the source code [only] to my users whom I've distributed a binary to and that the GPL specifically allows for this.
That's only the case if you include the source code along with the binaries. Otherwise you must accompany the binaries with a written offer for the source code, of which anybody (including those who aren't your customers) is then free to take advantage.
Hi.
I have just purchased the app and e-mailed the author asking for the source code. I got a prompt response that he is away from his desk and that he will forward the code to me tomorrow. He also asked me to forward my google play order reciept, which I did.
I will update everyone when I get the source code.
Is there a particular place that you would like me to put it? Sourceforge? somewhere else? Suggestions are welcome.
~Randy
Hi.
I have just purchased the app and e-mailed the author asking for the source code. I got a prompt response that he is away from his desk and that he will forward the code to me tomorrow. He also asked me to forward my google play order reciept, which I did.
I will update everyone when I get the source code.
Is there a particular place that you would like me to put it? Sourceforge? somewhere else? Suggestions are welcome.
~Randy
Attached is a link to the source code that he sent me. I just installed dropbox, so I am not sure how long this will take to be synchronized to the web site.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/19038556/dosbox_151.tar.bz2 [dropbox.com]
Yahma, if you are making the source code available with the binaries, instead of providing them separately, you've done your bit under the GPL. It's not your role to provide the sources to others, as has been discussed extensively elsewhere in this page. Your price is fine, and anybody who doesn't like it doesn't need to buy it. Even for a cost of redistribution of the source, $3.49 sounds reasonable - who knows the exact details of the distribution and what it costs? But your last point is right - TANS
Research is to see what everybody else has seen, and think what nobody
else has thought.
I am the author of DosBox Turbo (Score:5, Informative)
Thanks for the very lively and interesting discussion. The OP e-mailed a few days ago asking for the source code for DosBox Turbo [google.com]. I informed him that I make available the source code to my users whom I've distributed a binary to and that the GPL specifically allows for this. I also make available the source code to the upsteam DosBox devs, and forwarded them copies not too long ago. Furthermore, I've contacted the aDosBox devs and offered to port many of my improvements into the free aDosBox software for everyone to benefit. I've never heard back from the aDosBox devs, and I am assuming it is a dead project, as there has been no activity in over a year and no response to my messages in over 4 months.
While I respect the OP's opinion that (actual price on Google play is $3.49) is too much to pay (don't forget Google takes 30% off the top), the reality is, a majority of my time is spent providing user support, fixing bugs in various Android devices that my users have, and implementing new features and suggestions from my user-base. I've amassed a collection of no less than 8 different Android devices, so that I can reproduce a wide range of reported bugs.
The OP and I may disagree on what my time is worth; however, we did have a constructive discussion about perhaps moving to a model of charging for the value add-ons (which I currently provide for free), although, I'm not sure how easy that would be within the Google Play framework. I also suggested to him that there were numerous avenues for him to obtain a copy of the binary free of charge if price was a factor (one only has to search the various Android warez sites) and that I had no problems with him going that route.
While the OP may disagree with me, I believe that being able to charge for GPL software (and comply with the GPL) allows for development of better software with features and bug fixes that would normally never occur. Believe me, it is very time-consuming to sit around for hours answering user e-mails, or spending hours to fix hard to reproduce bugs that occur only on a specific version of Android or a specific device. Few, if any people, would do that kind of tedious work for free.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is one of fairness, not the amount - if you think $3.99 is fair for Yahma to charge for his efforts, why do you think it's fair that the original DOSBox developers, who contributed probably by far more work, get absolutely nothing? They must work for free, someone else earns an income off their work?
Re:I am the author of DosBox Turbo (Score:4, Informative)
As a point of fact, the GPL does not "specifically allow[]" you to make the source code available only to users who pay for a binary version. GPLv2 offers three choices when distributing a binary work covered by its terms: 3(a) accompany the binary version with the source code; 3(b) accompany the binary version with an offer to provide the source code to anyone, at no more than your cost to distribute the source; or 3(c) -- for non-commercial redistribution of binary forms -- with the same offer that one received according to 3(b).
Re: (Score:3)
If someone else gets the binary from you, does not accept your offer of the source code, then technically they cannot give the binary to anyone else! Why not? Because the same rules apply to them. If THEY give the binary to someone else, they are distributing, and THEY have to provide the source code.
No quite. If they are redistributing non-commercially, they can comply with section 3c merely by passing on the original written offer from the dev/distributor (Yahma).
However, if Yahma isn't including an offer of source to his customers for them to pass on (nor is he providing the source with the binaries), then he wasn't complying with the licence for the original DOSBox source he has modified. He therefore isn't entitled to use that code to base his derived work from. (Similarly Google Play, being a dist
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, looks like exactly the same situation. They are violating DOSBox's GPL.
Some suggestions (Score:1)
You sound like you are trying to be reasonable in all of this - you're trying to work with upstreams, you haven't said no to source requests, your pricing is not high etc. However there's a risk you'll run into issues:
It may be worth including the source to inside the apk - that way you can head off any requests for the source with a response that they are distributed alongside the binaries (which is close to what you want to do - distribute to those who financially contribute) and you should buy the binary
Re: (Score:2)
The DosBox devs don't appear militant
Just don't tell them you plan on using DOSBox to run applications that aren't games...
Re: (Score:2)
Nice, however from my reading of the GPLv2, it would seem that in order to avoid having to provide the source code to anyone who requests it from you, you need to distribute it with the binary.
My suggestion would be to add a very simple downloader to the app that will download the source code to the phone's sdcard.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a violation too. "The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable." So unless it's insanely hard to compile for y
Re: (Score:2)
So unless it's insanely hard to compile for you, it can't be insanely hard to compile for downstream receipients.
Sure it can. The only requirement is that downstream can compile it. If you use precompiled libs in your dev environment, but they have to compile their libs from source for a few hours on a machine with 16GB ram, then there is nothing wrong with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I am the author of DosBox Turbo (Score:5, Insightful)
That's only the case if you include the source code along with the binaries. Otherwise you must accompany the binaries with a written offer for the source code, of which anybody (including those who aren't your customers) is then free to take advantage.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Hi. I have just purchased the app and e-mailed the author asking for the source code. I got a prompt response that he is away from his desk and that he will forward the code to me tomorrow. He also asked me to forward my google play order reciept, which I did. I will update everyone when I get the source code. Is there a particular place that you would like me to put it? Sourceforge? somewhere else? Suggestions are welcome. ~Randy
Attached is a link to the source code that he sent me. I just installed dropbox, so I am not sure how long this will take to be synchronized to the web site. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/19038556/dosbox_151.tar.bz2 [dropbox.com]
Re: (Score:2)