AnthraX Linux Kernels Remain Closed Source

[AnonymousCoward]

I've watched Chad progressively lock down his binaries over the past year to the point where nobody can get them and access to Anthrax is now an exclusive club on a filesharing site his old domain was associated with.



Yet the post above yours suggests otherwise.

You have to register to be able to get access to it, therefore it can't be considered "public". Registering implies becoming a member...

[AnonymousCoward]

I hope this gets settled in court, I'm curious of the outcome.

[GreatEmerald]

That implies a public release, which never took place.

In my view it did. The forum isn't an organisation in my book. I don't see myself as a member of the Phoronix organisation, for instance. Premium members would probably apply, though; but they have to add a contribution, not just register, and their numbers are way, way smaller than simple forum members. Also, doing a public release and declaring "Not for public distribution or use" doesn't make any sense. It's like someone graffiting "Do not put graffiti on this wall".

In general, I have to agree that the person got himself in a lot of trouble for completely no reason, but probably out of frustration, of all things. Having the GPL kernel output things like "Closed Source" and "you have no rights under GPL" is just raising a red flag that the person has tainted the kernel, and did that intentionally and knowingly. It's not helping, but rather the opposite.

[LLStarks]

You have to register to be able to get access to it, therefore it can't be considered "public". Registering implies becoming a member...

That's not membership for Anthrax, that's membership for the Infected Rom forum that the thread was located on.

The two are only loosely related and Anthrax set up shop there since the forum is mostly abandoned.

[AnonymousCoward]

In my view it did. The forum isn't an organisation in my book. I don't see myself as a member of the Phoronix organisation, for instance. Premium members would probably apply, though; but they have to add a contribution, not just register, and their numbers are way, way smaller than simple forum members. Also, doing a public release and declaring "Not for public distribution or use" doesn't make any sense. It's like someone graffiting "Do not put graffiti on this wall".

In general, I have to agree that the person got himself in a lot of trouble for completely no reason, but probably out of frustration, of all things. Having the GPL kernel output things like "Closed Source" and "you have no rights under GPL" is just raising a red flag that the person has tainted the kernel, and did that intentionally and knowingly. It's not helping, but rather the opposite.

You are still however part of the forum, a "member" of the Phoronix community in this case. A Forum could be considered an organisiation if the members have a common goal, in their case the anthrax kernel. If people would have not registered on those forums (and not become a member), they would not have had access to the binaries (unless it got leaked).

[AnonymousCoward]

That's not membership for Anthrax, that's membership for the Infected Rom forum that the thread was located on.

The two are only loosely related and Anthrax set up shop there since the forum is mostly abandoned.

I assumed he only ever released it on his own forums, well then it is considered a public release.

[a user]

You have to register to be able to get access to it, therefore it can't be considered "public". Registering implies becoming a member...

this is, in genral, not so simple as you might think. i know of plenty examples that contradict your claim.
for example if the registration process is more or less automatically granting access for everyone than it IS considered public.

[LLStarks]

https://plus.google.com/115556873499158641618/posts/ZXcnb9ttrhm

Here's Eric D (Chad's friend) talking about their new distribution method and how they posted new sources (tarballs?) only to quickly and spitefully remove them.

Such maniacal directions and trust exercises just to become a member.

[Sergio]

In my view it did. The forum isn't an organisation in my book. I don't see myself as a member of the Phoronix organisation, for instance. Premium members would probably apply, though; but they have to add a contribution, not just register, and their numbers are way, way smaller than simple forum members. Also, doing a public release and declaring "Not for public distribution or use" doesn't make any sense. It's like someone graffiting "Do not put graffiti on this wall".

In general, I have to agree that the person got himself in a lot of trouble for completely no reason, but probably out of frustration, of all things. Having the GPL kernel output things like "Closed Source" and "you have no rights under GPL" is just raising a red flag that the person has tainted the kernel, and did that intentionally and knowingly. It's not helping, but rather the opposite.

I think the issue is entirely subjective, at least for us that do not know exactly the definitions implied. I could argue whatever to justify putting it online, yet let it clear that it is there only for the convenience of the company (or whatever), and that it is illegal for the general public to get; the general public would be warned, and thus be responsible if they choose to get the copy.

[AnonymousCoward]

this is, in genral, not so simple as you might think. i know of plenty examples that contradict your claim.
for example if the registration process is more or less automatically granting access for everyone than it IS considered public.

That makes sense, what about "registration pending review", if he would have enabled that on his own forums then it would be considered private (I don't know if he did, and besides he posted the links on another forum so it's a public release).