Can someone explain to me what is an open source community, gpl, and what the hell did this Ziggy character did?
I thought kernels behaves differently on different phones ran ziggys on g3d and it was stable as hell the only rebooted I had was when I decided to I put kangbang on cm7 my phone went retarded. And I wanna know what is he exactly stealing if its open source."loonatik78 said:Good question! It's a question a LOT more Android users should be asking. I'm happy to answer...
The Open Source community can be summed up as a community of developers and users that believe in and practice leaving source code open to the end user, and volunteering any source they may alter back to the community in an effort to foster evolution of the code. In effect, it's communal development. GPL stand for General Public License, and is a form of copyleft, as opposed to copyright, of software, and explicitly lays out the legal nature of the material that it addresses. The GPL is the foundation of Open Source.
Android, which is covered under the Apache licence, is powered by the Linux kernel. In order to remain compliant with Apache, compliance with the GPL must be adhered to. Ziggy develops Linux kernels for Android. Under GPLv2, two requirement must be met to develop any Linux kernel. First, source code must be provided upon request, and second, a copy of the GPLv2 must accompany and distribution of Linux. The second condition is met because Android comes with a copy of the GPL in the "About Phone..." section of "Settings". The first condition, providing source code, must be met by the developer.
Ziggy has not released source for any of his kernels in roughly 4 months, and has never released source for the gingerbread branch he's been working on. This puts him wildly outside the legal bounds of the GPL. His actions are criminal in the truest sense of the word. But the greater issue has to do with his theft from the community. The effect the GPL has on Linux is to make the source code legal community property. Nobody has any personal right to it, whether they wrote it or not. Ziggy conducts himself as though it IS his property, to decide who does and doesn't get it, and who's allowed to use it. This is simply wrong. Ziggy KNOWS this. Unfortunately, too few people understand what the GPL is, what the Apache license is, how they've influenced the Android community. In short, there would be no Android development community like we know it if it weren't for the GPL and the Apache licence. AOSP would NEVER have been born.
Oh okay now I see basically gpl hands you a piece of paper and pencil and say here do whatever you want with it but whatever you make with it let it be picasso or davinci you have no right to it. But whoever makes the phones can put it in their next product so the android community can pay for it. Or am I misunderstanding what your saying?"loonatik78 said:A kernel should always perform the same on every device so long as the hardware is the same. There's not a random circuit generator in the hardware, and there's no random code generator in the software. Ziggy is stealing the source code for his kernel from the community. Open Source isn't a one way street, it's a two way street. One lane allows anyone to obtain code and do with it as they please, but the other lane of traffic dictates you share that code with the community. It's not optional. If you're not putting traffic on both the coming and going lanes of the open source highway, you're stealing. But lets say someone says "But Ziggy put his own work into it! It's his time, effort, skill, and experience! Not mine or yours or "the community's!" That would be completely WRONG. When Ziggy obtained code and modified it, he accepted the terms and conditions of GPLv2, and GPLv2 gives him NO LEGAL RIGHTS of ownership to any of his work, but instead clearly identifies the community as the rightful owners of Ziggy's personal work on the Linux kernel. The idea of theft through neglect or lack of action is an alien concept to a capitalistic society where personal property rights are intrinsic to our way of thinking of the world, but it is in fact the case here. Linux isn't capitalist and it respects no man's personal rights. It's communist, in the purest sense. It's "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" and it's not optional.
I never thought I'd be defending the ideals of communism, but lets face facts, communism does have a use. Strip it of it's 100 years of ugly political rhetoric, and you've got yourself an excellent model for software development. That's what Linux is.
Man I'm feeling so ignorant right now but I gotta ask one more ? I'm assuming when you say everybody that includes me you Ziggy phone makers right? So were basicallly paying 600 dollars for paper weight Coz its obvious the os is Google and its open source and under gpl law its free to everybody right?"yarly said:GPL is far more than just android. It encompasses a large portion of the software the runs on linux in general.
GPL says you can take what you want in an "all you can eat," style farmer's market, but anything you prepare as food with what you took, you have to share (for free) with everyone else in the community afterwards IF you intend on distributing it for others to have as well.
Basically that is to prevent someone from selling the software for profit or being selfish. There are those that still the software on CDs for people who do not want to download it, but they must also offer the source for free somehow nonetheless.
If you want to read more, check out the wiki on it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL
I didn't say android is gpl I said its open source so it falls under gpl law. You don't like to build your own so you'll pay a company to build you one which is supposedly free is that what your saying ? Lets say Ziggy is that company making this os for your phone would you still rant about him being a thief or not Coz he's got his own pretty logo like HTC Motorola etc."loonatik78 said:Android isn't GPL. It's licensed under Apache. It's a more permissive license. I suppose you could say its free, buy I really don't feel like building my own build of Android or a nice UI for it. Or making the equipment myself.
Really? Ha! I guess I misunderstood everything then. When somebody say I got an android phone I automatically assume its open source and nobody will say shit what he does with that phone for example Motorola locking their bootloader nobody can do anyrhing Coz is open source and its their phone their product! Man I'm such a dumbass"yarly said:If Ziggy built his own kernel from the ground up (without taking from the linux kernel) or modified a kernel source that used a more permissive license (such as on of the bsd/unix variants which fall under a license similar to the one the Android OS [sans kernel] uses), which would be way too much work), then he could close off everything and give nothing back if he did not feel like it.
HTC, Moto, et al. do not have to give back their modifications to the Android OS source (not to be confused with the kernel), which is modders have to work with the compiled libraries when they mod Sense and other Frameworks that come on the non-nexus phones.