Supporters of “open-source”

[fophillips]

In the source code you claim to have licensed boxee under the GPLv2, but before downloading the software you place many restrictions on the software which contradict the GPL. In fact it prevents freedoms two and three from the 4 freedoms. Adding to the fact that this is in fact a derivative of XBMC this is in violation of their license.

Could you please make the situation clearer?

[Gamester17]

I could be wrong but I believe that Boxee are allowed to place those restrictions as long as they are a closed Alpha for invitees only, but when they release their first public release (which they said that their first Beta will be) then they must remove any NDA and allow the free redistrobution of the open source code, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softwar...ase_life_cycle

[belovedmonster]

According to Wikipedia:

XBMC as a whole is distributed under the GNU General Public License (with a few libraries used by XBMC licensed under the LGPL).

How is making a derivative of a GPL app not allowed? I'll be the first to admit that I'm not an open source licence expert but your suggestion that it's not allowed sounds wrong. Besides Boxee actively send code upstream to XBMC and have their blessing.

[belovedmonster]

Also, this pasted from the GNU FAQ
-----------------------------------------------
The GPL does not require you to release your modified version, or any part of it. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization.

But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL.

Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in certain ways, and not in other ways; but the decision of whether to release it is up to you.
-----------------------------------------------

So as Gamester17 said, while they are still in a private alpha it doesn't require for the source code to be available. In signing up for an alpha you are effectively becoming a member of their organization and thus distribution counts as private and not public.

[fophillips]

How is making a derivative of a GPL app not allowed? I'll be the first to admit that I'm not an open source licence expert but your suggestion that it's not allowed sounds wrong. Besides Boxee actively send code upstream to XBMC and have their blessing.

It is allowed, but they cannot relicense the derivative under a non-compatible license which is what they are doing.

I am still not convinced they are allowed to relicense someone else’s copyrighted work, privately or not. They may not need to publicly release the source, but that is something different entirely.

[belovedmonster]

It is allowed, but they cannot relicense the derivative under a non-compatible license which is what they are doing.

How is GPL not compatible with GPL?

[fophillips]

How is GPL not compatible with GPL?

It isn’t released under the GPL, that is the whole point. Read the terms and conditions on the source code download page. They are positively non-free.

[belovedmonster]

It isn’t released under the GPL, that is the whole point. Read the terms and conditions on the source code download page. They are positively non-free.

As we have already established, they don't need to release the code under GPL because its privately distributed not publicly. No where on the terms and conditions page does it say that they releasing it under GPL, at least not in a way Firefox can find with Ctrl + F, so at the moment none of their restrictions are going against the GPL.

Once Boxee becomes publicly available then it must release code under GPL, in which case all the non free restrictions must be removed. (Which they will be anyways because they don't make sense when anyone can get an account and download the software).

Understand now?

GPL only comes into it when it is publicly available so they can't currently be breaking it.

[fophillips]

No where on the terms and conditions page does it say that they releasing it under GPL, at least not in a way Firefox can find with Ctrl + F, so at the moment none of their restrictions are going against the GPL.

The source code itself does and it is based off GPL’d software, so yes they do go against the GPL.

GPL only comes into it when it is publicly available so they can't currently be breaking it.

I don’t really know where you got that idea from, it is still distributed and the source code that is distributed to those people needs to be under the GPL wether it be public or not.

[belovedmonster]

I don’t really know where you got that idea from, it is still distributed and the source code that is distributed to those people needs to be under the GPL wether it be public or not.

Where have I gotten the idea from? From the official GNU website FAQ under the question "Do I have to release the source code?", the answer to which you yourself have also read because I pasted the entire answer in a reply above.

It clearly states that you only need to release the code under GPL when it is publicly available, not privately. Do the words "Private alpha" not suggest that perhaps this is a private distribution rather than public?

The GNU FAQ clearly states that you can distribute modified code freely within the same organisation. Yet ironically, the very thing you are complaining isnt free is the fact all alpha testers have to agree to become part of the Boxee organisation and agree to abide by Boxees rules while in that organisation.

I can't comment on the contents of the source code because I've not downloaded it and I have no need to download it. But in principle Boxee do not need to release under GPL because this is a private thing. You seem to think that just because it's online and free it is automatically a public thing. It is not. It is private.