GPL Code Found In OpenBSD Wireless Driver 671
NormalVisual writes "The mailing lists were buzzing recently when Michael Buesch, one of the maintainers for the GPL'd bc43xx Broadcom wireless chip driver project, called the OpenBSD folks to task for apparently including code without permission from his project in the OpenBSD bcw project, which aims to provide functionality with Broadcom wireless chips under that OS. It seems that the problem has been resolved for now with the BSD driver author totally giving up on the project and Theo De Raadt taking the position that Buesch's posts on the subject were 'inhuman.'" More commentary from the BSD community is over at undeadly.org.
Re:Summary: Theo went over the top (Score:5, Interesting)
Anything that manages to get out in the free world needs to stay there, and any reasonable person will do his best to ensure it does. Further, using the GPL as a weapon against Broadcom, forcing them to open up their specs is really to the collective advantage of everyone.
Re:Well, Theo is something of an asshat (Score:5, Interesting)
Bruce
Re:The BSD folks seem to be whiners (Score:1, Interesting)
Eh? He offered to licence at least parts of it to BSD (it would make no sense to licence it all, since then it'd not be GPL protected any more). Why is offering to licence code, to someone who stole it without asking in the first place, being an asshole, but saying "you fucked up, get it out" is cool?
The BSD guy's first response shows what an asshat he was - explicity saying that he stole it with the intention of then rewriting it bit by bit to circumvent the copyright. Nice clean room implementation eh? Not that he'd got as far as the bit by bit cirumvention - he'd only progressed as far as the blatant stealing.
As the World Turns (Score:5, Interesting)
Without question, the Linux developer did not need to cc the whole word when first making his inquiry -- he should have contacted them in private. I would also suspect that the BSD developer was just using the Linux code as a drop-in replacement for the time being until he rewrote it with a BSD license. I do not believe the BSD developer was trying to steal anything or take credit for something he did not develop. He made a mistake, for sure, but I do not believe there was any ill will on his part.
However, the biggest story in all of this is just how freaking childish Theo is. I cannot for the life of me figure this guy out. He kills his own cause and make OBSD look like a playground for schoolyard bullies. Imagine how much better he and OBSD would have looked if they had responded to the initial mailing list post with something like: "Hey, we would have appreciated it if you had contacted us privately. In any event, we are quite confident there was no intent to take GPL code in violation of the license. However, we will discuss this, decide the appropriate remedy, and respond to you privately. Thank you for bringing this to our attention."
Matter solved, no drama. But Theo has to open his big fat mouth. Theo: it's called taking the high road, even if you didn't start it. Try it sometime.
Besides, Theo himself cross-posts to other lists all the time to incite flame wars. Just look at last month's FreeBSD-advocacy list -- he cross posted during a thread about the use of his dear Puffy on an anti-blob poster. Pot, meet kettle.
Re:Thank god for ndiswrapper (Score:1, Interesting)
I'd give it a try again.
Re:The war against BSD continues (Score:1, Interesting)
Theo carried on like a silly little child that dropped their favorite teddybear, rather that saying "whoops, how can we resolve this?".
It's a BSD mailing list in question, hardly anyone uses OpenBSD, and a damn sight fewer bother with their mailing lists. Get real here, public my fat hairy arse!
Re:The war against BSD continues (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Straw man attacks and ad hominem from Theo (Score:1, Interesting)
Then keep said stuff the hell out of your public repository if you don't want problems.
Theo is responding with an appropriate amount of emotion if you ask me.
It was an appropriate amount of emotion for a pre-schooler, not for a 38 year old professional software engineer.
He just lost a developer over what was a mistake because some egotistical coder went public with something that out of respect should have been addressed privately first.
No, Theo lost a project because said developer wanted to be a drama queen and say, "fine, I'm taking my toys and going home!" instead of accepting Buesch's gracious offer of help and licensing for part of the code. I think he got his feelings hurt because Buesch called him on the issue publicly, and IMHO that's just too bad for him.
Re:Summary of the Facts (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Broadcom using bcm43xx code? Hah! (Score:3, Interesting)
What, it was all a viral GPL-pervert scheme to trick righteous BSD developers into copying their work?
By offering to negotiate including their code in the BSD project?
Re:Well, Theo is something of an asshat (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Overreactions... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Summary: Theo went over the top (Score:3, Interesting)
I am the Real Bruce Perens, by the way. Just kidding.
Re:Summary: Theo went over the top (Score:3, Interesting)
An EULA is not legally binding because it is (illegally) forced on you after the sale of a product, restricting your legal rights. The GPL is not forced on you; if you choose to reject it, normal copyright kicks in. If you choose to accept the GPL you receive additional rights not normally given to you under normal copyright.
The GPL has been out there for a great number of years. I hope your comment is based on little knowledge on the difference between EULAs and the GPL, and not on intentional putting down the GPL.
And the RIAA is well known for representing record labels, not artists. Do not let orwellian naming schemes fool you.
Re:Not his fault? Is he a ward of the state? (Score:4, Interesting)
Really? I read him as being defensive of his contributors. Like a thinking, caring supervisor would. There's no question it could have been handled better. The very public airing of the violation was almost certainly intended to hurt rather than help. Theo made that point.
Every time something like this comes up, I hear a lot of "Theo is an asshole", but then I read the messages involved and I fail to see the assholery. He seems to be smart, articulate and protective of his project--as I'd expect him to be. About 70% of this bruhaha is juvenile "Linux vs. BSD" cockfights.
Re:Summary: Theo went over the top (Score:3, Interesting)
Having read the thread--was Michael's *very* public outing of the violation justified? Or would it have been solved easier and with less drama with a simple email to Marcus alone?
'Cause that was Theo's point.
Re:Broadcom using bcm43xx code? Hah! (Score:1, Interesting)
That's just one example. There were plenty of others.
Re:Not his fault? Is he a ward of the state? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is the BSD community getting a little too insular? Is that what's going on? Maybe they are insecure about the wide attention Linux gets and the restrictions GPLed code puts on their own work. At the same time, Theo's response was inappropriate. And while Marcus did pull the driver code, he likely didn't over the initial email. The resulting exchange probably had a greater role in pushing him out, and Theo was just as much a part of that as Michael.
I'm not sure I'd ever want to contribute work to a project with a figurehead as negatively reactive as Theo.