CherryOS On Hold 314
aberkvam writes "MacWorld is reporting that CherryOS is "On Hold - until further notice." Does this mean that they are going to confirm that they used PearPC's code or is this just a delaying tactic due to the potentially pending lawsuit? Slashdot has covered this saga before."
Big surprise... feh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Big surprise... feh (Score:5, Insightful)
By the way, what does this have to do with Apple? They're both PowerPC emulators, the fact that it will run OSX is incidental.
Re:Big surprise... feh (Score:5, Informative)
Correct, however CherryOS specifically says on their web site that it is there in order to run OSX on x86 hardware. PearPC gives instructions on how to run OSX but doesn't really claim that it's whole purpose is to do so, which CherryOS does.
Re:Big surprise... feh (Score:2)
Unfortunately for them, it's too late now if they've already violated the license. It would be particularly apparent they did this if they changed sepcific obvious bits in their code now. However, at the same time we see a disadvantage with open source code; no one was easily able to sue them. I read about the donations taken, yes, but since then everything wen
Re:Big surprise... feh (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Big surprise... feh (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Big surprise... feh (Score:5, Informative)
One post quotes a letter from them [pearpc.net]:
That might also fit the scenario of limiting legal exposure and/or acting in response to legal approaches made on behalf of the PearPC developers.Was there ever any doubt? (Score:5, Insightful)
Which reminds me, if your really want Mac OS, then just get the real thing.
Re:Was there ever any doubt? (Score:2)
Couldn't CherryOS just add the source to the PearPC peices to their distro package?
Re:Was there ever any doubt? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Was there ever any doubt? (Score:2)
Wait for it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Waaa, waaa! It's not theft it's copyright infringement. Waaa, waaa!
Re:Wait for it... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's true, although in this case it's also commercial fraud.
Re:Wait for it... (Score:4, Interesting)
There is a difference, but it doesn't mean what they are doing is theft, or that it is anymore theft than making copies of content/software you don't own.
When one makes the statement that people who copy movies/music/software aren't "stealing" because they are making a copy of existing code and the original content authors are not out anything (because they still have their original copy), they are making the distinction that it only becomes theft if you remove the original from the hands of the owner. In this case, the PearPC guys still have all of their own original code. They aren't "out" anything except possibly for the credit of their original work. How are they "losing" out on anything by the CherryOS guys copying their code? If you say they are out potential revenues from selling their code, then you are acknowledging that the ??AA has a point, aren't you?
In both cases, people are releasing their intellectual property to the world under certain conditions. In one case, they say you can use the property however you want, you just can't give copies of it to other people. In the other, they say you can use the property however you want, and you can give it to other people, but only if you also do it in it's original form (source code). Both parties have the right to put whatever conditions they wish on redistribution, no?
Re:Wait for it... (Score:3, Insightful)
I see where you're going with this, but it isn't quite the same. CherryOS aren't just redistributing the code, they're packaging it as their own and profiting from it. If you want to use a music analogy, it's like someone downloading a couple of Metallica (to pick an anti-sharing band) albums, burning them to CD, printing out their own sleeve, and selling it as their own work. Make no mistake, I can't stand people that download and distribute thousands of MP3s of tracks they haven't paid for, but this is mu
Re:Wait for it... (Score:5, Insightful)
PearPC is an OPEN product that you can get for free/libre as well as Free/Speech. I can go get the code from PearPC right now and distribute it, change it, etc. There are very little rules wrt the PearPC code. The main rule is that if you modify any of the PearPC code, that new code also must be under the same license. These CherryOS guys are flippin their middle finger at that.
The only way your MPAA/RIAA argument would be even close would be if the MPAA/RIAA allowed free distribution of _all_ their content and had only the requirement that if someone modified their content, that new content would be covered by the same license. Please, shoot me an email the day the MPAA/RIAA make that policy change!
Re:"Theft" hypocrisy on /. (Score:2)
1)Only the greediest of the greedy care less about their work being falsly credited to someone else than they do about potential DRM dollars from copyright artificial scarcity.
Re:Was there ever any doubt? (Score:3, Informative)
The only piece of the puzzle that's illegal is getting the boot code ROM. If you actually own a Macintosh Quadra, you can rip it and be done with illegally. Or you can hunt around for pir8z0rz, being a (here comes flamebait) a thief
wrong season (Score:3, Funny)
Re:wrong season (Score:5, Funny)
The last I checked, cherry harvest begins starting spring break, in Cancun and Miami.
Why does everything take so damned long? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why does everything take so damned long? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why does everything take so damned long? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why does everything take so damned long? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why does everything take so damned long? (Score:2)
Re:Why does everything take so damned long? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why does everything take so damned long? (Score:2)
http://www.atheists.org/ [atheists.org]
Thanks to Madalyn Murray O'Hair atheists get to inspire the same warm fuzzies that Jerry Falwell inspires.
Re:too right (Score:5, Funny)
* ---- Joke
O
-|- --- You
Any questions?
Re:too right (Score:5, Funny)
Re:too right (Score:2)
You think? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You think? (Score:5, Funny)
pass01...
pass02...
pass03...
pass04...
pass05...
pass06...
pass07...
Re:You think? (Score:2, Funny)
Dammit....
pass12543...
Re:You think? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:You think? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:You think? (Score:5, Funny)
Good! (Score:5, Interesting)
Confirm? (Score:5, Informative)
You got it wrong (Score:3, Funny)
Re:You got it wrong (Score:3, Funny)
Why does this scam get so much coverage? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why does this scam get so much coverage? (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically it gets so much coverage because it's so unbelievable how stupid they are.
AHHHH... If I Recall Correctly... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:AHHHH... If I Recall Correctly... (Score:2)
Re:AHHHH... If I Recall Correctly... (Score:2)
Re:Why does this scam get so much coverage? (Score:3, Informative)
It's mostly because PowerPC has more registers.
An x86 emulating PowerPC must supplement its limited supply of registers with memory, which is really slow even though it happens mostly in L1 cache. Emulating x86 on PowerPC is easier because PowerPC has enough registers to emulate all of the x86 registers without touching memory.
Altivec emulation sucks, but it's not the primary suckage.
Re:Why does this scam get so much coverage? (Score:2, Insightful)
Any other questions?
Various conspiracy theories... (Score:5, Funny)
"Cherry" and "pulled out" in same sentence (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Various conspiracy theories... (Score:2)
Maui software actually was "inspired" by PearPC and hired a Pakistani company to create a similar product. The Pakistani company secretly stole PearPC to deliver the product on time (partly because they had no idea what they were doing) and then Maui compounded the issue by covering the fact that they'd used an overseas company. (They didn't want to drive customers away by admitting that.) So now Maui has a hot (as in stolen) product on their hands, and is trying like hel
Re:Various conspiracy theories... (Score:2)
I interviewed for a contract position at which the labor was estimated to be about 1000-1500 man hours. 500 machines, each process took 2-3 hours. And yet -- the contract duration was 2 months. It was obvious at the end of the two months either, I would take the blame for not having done the impossible task, or depending on the terms of the contract, I mi
Re:Various conspiracy theories... (Score:3, Interesting)
| Cherry is a really pathetic name - and I'm pretty
| sure it's already trademarked for some other
| computer equiptment [sic]
Yeah, no kidding. Smells like another Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox to me. For instance:
Maybe they are getting out of the whole crowded fruit-based naming convention, and thus, avoid the obligatory Pac-Man jokes that
Re:Various conspiracy theories... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Various conspiracy theories... (Score:2)
Right on; same Cherry [cherrycorp.com].
In addition to making lots of cool POS keyboards [scanonline.com] and bump bars [allthingspos.com], you may recall the Cherry CyMotion Master Linux keyboard [slashdot.org] (scoffing emphasis mine).
I love their POS stuff, but that Linux keyboard was a little schmaltzy.
Re:Various conspiracy theories... (Score:2, Funny)
Too bad (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Too bad (Score:2, Insightful)
To not take this post off-topic, it's terrible that the CherryOS is getting so much attention. PearPC is a great project, and the damage that CherryOS has done to the PearPC project is almost irreversible.
In the page source.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course its on hold! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Of course its on hold! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Of course its on hold! (Score:2)
Re:Of course its on hold! (Score:2)
Don't speak about things you don't know about.
Cherry O's (Score:5, Funny)
Cherry OS has decided to restructure and rename their company/product, in response to a possible lawsuit.
Their new name is no Cherry O's, and they well now be selling breakfast cereal.
Later that day Kellogg's has announced they are seeking to sue Cherry O's claiming that the company "Just slapped a sticker on our boxes of Apple Jacks"
A Cherry O's spokesman was quoted in saying "I don't know what the problem is, we both use the cereal language."
Hope this goes to court (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hope this goes to court (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright more relevant than the GPL (Score:2)
Oh Please. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hope this goes to court (Score:2)
Ehm, even if this case doesn't go to court, but cherry os complies with the GPL, wouldn't it be a strong indication, that the GPL is valid?
Logically? Yes. Legally? No. Legally, all it means is that they either think it is valid (as you state later) or think it a cheaper solution to simply adhere than fight a court battle even if they are likely to prevail in that fight.
That is why people want the GPL to actually go to court. Once a decision is issued about it in a court case, there is a binding l
Off-topic curiosity... (Score:2)
At some stage would it be possible to run OS X through a Linux back end w/o having X or a Linux DE running at all?
What I'm saying is, could it evolve to where you boot right into OSX? Or does it have to run in a window (like the screenshots show)?
Re:Off-topic curiosity... (Score:2)
why under an APPLE group/heading (Score:3, Insightful)
The issue in NOT with the emulation of a PPC systems that can run LINUX too, it is an issue about theft!
Why do we care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why do we care? (Score:2)
Re:Why do we care? (Score:2)
Well, I care because I think it's funny. The idea that we should ignore them and not give them attention does carry some weight with me, but I'm not concerned that giving them attention is going to do any serious damage. I wouldn't think the attention would result in actual sales of their product, which could be the only damage I could see, but if it did, I'd still blame the purchaser for not doing some research.
It's kind of a "do we feed the trolls for entertainment, or ignore them and hope they go awa
Can anyone help? (Score:5, Funny)
All I'm getting is a black screen. Is there something wrong, or am I playing the game already?
Re:Can anyone help? (Score:3, Funny)
The problem is, all these operating systems use different sizes of electrons. You have to use a virtual compiler to reinstate the Java Virtual Machine on an ISA Port, and that will enable your electrons to recalibrate.
As you know, the monitor works with an electron gun. Your different size electrons are probably hitting the monitor at the same time, and the wave
Re:Can anyone help? (Score:2)
Their eyes crossed and they started babbling...
Re:Can anyone help? (Score:2)
Re:Can anyone help? (Score:4, Funny)
A black screen ? You're definitely playing the game already.
Legitimate question: what's the opposing argument? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Legitimate question: what's the opposing argume (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do authors plagiarize literature, or painters copy Van Gogh? Because they think they will find customers who don't know the difference, or who don't care.
Cherry OS Press Contact (Score:2, Informative)
what it might be... (Score:3, Interesting)
or
2. They still think they can, but they need more time to hide code. Obviously they didn't do a good enough job. LOL
or
3. Lawyers scared them.
Then again I don't know. I've refocused myself on PearPC and helping with it. I could care less anymore what these monkeys do anymore. Let the lawyers sort this one out.
VX30 (Score:5, Informative)
My whole info archive (with demo releases of CherryOS, VX30, etc) are all at
http://www.tliquest.net/ryan/cherryos [tliquest.net]
-eventhorizon
Re:VX30 (Score:5, Informative)
I found only one reference in the code to verypdf:
---
ryan@europa:/data/home/ryan/xpdf$ grep -ir verypdf pdfconv
pdfconv/src/MyReg.cpp: "Dear verypdf.com Inc:%0a"
---
Here's the diff file I made between VeryPDF's PDF2HTML code and Arben's PdfConv source:
http://www.tliquest.net/ryan/cherryos/other/pdfco
That diff is proof enough. So with the way they treat the GPL, it seems as if everything they make is dirty.
-eventhorizon
MOD UP (Score:2)
Small article grip (Score:2)
Open Source is not opposed to commercial. Open Source is opposed to secret source, not commercial. There are definitely companies who's sole purpose is to make a profit on Open Source software. If that's not commercial, I don't know what is.
Source Date (Score:2, Interesting)
Who the hell cares (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Deserve (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not stealing/piracy/buzzword of the week. It is copyright infrigment.
Re:Deserve (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, both cases are copyright infringement, but I guess "it's worse" when you take code, repackage it, call it your own, deny you stole it, and try to sell it.
Re:Deserve (Score:2)
Plagiarism (Score:5, Insightful)
[Copyright infringement that identifies the author and copyright infringement that does not identify the author are] the same thing ethically speaking.
Not necessarily. There's copyright infringement (violating a government-granted monopoly), and then there's plagiarism (not identifying the author). European "moral rights" make plagiarism an offence per se, while the United States handles plagiarism under the "passing off" provisions of trademark law and under 17 USC 1202 of copyright law.
CherryOS is copyright infringement AND stealing (Score:3, Insightful)
Distributing CherryOS against the terms set forth by the copyright holder is copyright infringement, not theft, because the copyright holder is still in posession of the original code. Therefore CherryOS code is NOT "stolen".
What IS stolen are the rights granted by the copyright holder. When you pirate closed software you "steal comparatively little because the copyright holder grante very few rights (it is still wrong nonetheless). When you pira
Re:Deserve (Score:5, Insightful)
controversially?
Arguably?
Considering the inevitable arguments regarding the fact that the owners still have their software, and are in no way deprived of the use of it, there are many people who disagree.
Religion doesn't enter into it.
Morally, morality is a personal thing.
Practically there's a key difference. The PearPC creators still have their code.
If you're arguing that it fits your definition of stealing, fine. I'll argue its jaywalking because it fits my definition of jaywalking. But then we might as well be talking different languages.
The only reason to call it stealing is because the term has negative connotations. How about using a less emotive term?
Re:Deserve (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not even close. Nobody can "steal" GPL'd code - it is there for all to see and modify as they see fit. That's the whole point.
What you can't do is take that code, modify it, sell the binaries and then refuse to give your contributions back to the community. That is what the CherryOS people have done, and that is a GPL violation. As the copyrighted code is provided under the GPL only under the terms of said GPL, violation of it is by extension a copyright violation.
But you can't "steal" something that is freely available, so it is not just semantics whether or not it was "theft".
Yes, it was wrong - that's not the issue. But just as we're constantly berating the RIAA/MPAA for their hyperbole on such issues, we have to be careful in what we say about GPL-related copyright violations too.. especially as this is even further removed from "theft" than what people do when they download music or movies.
Mod parent up (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Deserve (Score:2, Interesting)
What??
While I agree that those that infringe on the GPL should be pursued and prosecuted, I don't agree that "untreated" actions have any bearing on the validity of the GPL as a software copyright license.
From my vantage, there are two avenues for pursuing violators--one equals cash (as in lawyers), the other (in this case) equals exposing the truth (as you have indicated). As the article states numerous bloggers and others have pointed ou
Re:Easy (Score:2)
Re:Copyright question (Score:2)
They sure can. Just because they stole section A from someone else does not negate their rights over section B they wrote themselves.
The author (or copyright holder) of section A can sue them, but that's not saying the same thing.
The GPL says that in order to distribute section A they must distribute the source code for section B for free, but if they choose not to do that, it doesn't give you the right to distribute