MEPIS grundgingly complies with the GPL
Submitted by srlinuxx on Mon, 07/31/2006 - 19:45.
MEPIS LLC, the popular Ubuntu-based Linux distributor, has finally released its distribution source code under the GPL. Warren Woodford, the Morgantown, WV-based company's CEO, is not one bit pleased with being forced to do so.
In his FAQ on how MEPIS is complying with the GPL, Woodford writes, "The GPL license and the Free Software Foundation make sense to me if I assume that the purpose of the GPL license is to force the redistribution of all source code and to prevent commerce that does not include the unencumbered redistribution of all source code. The FSF recommends that you assign your copyrights to them, so they can insure your software 'freedom.' If the FSF succeeds, all source code will be GPL licensed and controlled by the Free Software Foundation; and all Laws regarding software patents and copyrights will be rendered ineffective."
Woodford has long disagreed with some parts of the GPL. He recently ran into some trouble with its requirement that downstream distributors of GPL code are obligated to provide source code to users in an easily accessible format.
Mepis is not perfect, so why hide it ?
Some of us who weighs the benefits of open source and commercial prospects of protecting one's intelllectual properties should have a clear conscience. Releasing the source codes by charging a fee is one way of doing it?
The truth of the matter is that open source had many bugs transfered to the new distro. Another cost to bear when you want to fix the bugs. For many years, RedHat, Mandrake and Suse live on such revenue from their large customers. Mepis does have this source of revenue as well, if Warren begin to sell into that market. If not then Mepis may suffer the same fate that Mandriva is fighting to survive?
Mepis is not perfect because of the source codes that Mepis adopted. Mepis' modification may not be perfected either. So, a wise choice is to open source it and too allow others to do bug fixing for free for Mepis.
It goes both ways. Give and take. Good Luck, Warren, you made the right decision, but for the wrong reason(to protect codes modified on imperfect codes that is not yours). Its like building a castle on shifting sand.