Topic: SME Server ( Clone ? )

[fargo]

Ok, i would contribute another 100 EUR for every reasonable effort to sue Moses and his Kirux stuff.

[u27g8mdm]

Quote from their site:
With the help of the open source community, Linuxon has designed a simple yet powerful and secure web and mail server,

From the demo server-manager the only change is logo on the header

It would seem that there are even more of such "rip-offs" than most of us expect.

Can they really be stopped at all ?

[u27g8mdm]

That link does not work anymore as he has changed his project name away from a title that includes "sme" to

http://freshmeat.net/projects/kuadraes/

Same project and description just a different project name and still regestered under a proprietary license.

Smart move on his part, he wants to keep all references to the SME Server as far away as possible from KES.

[garret]

We are looking into these issues and trying to decide how best to move forward.

Thanks
Garret

[djhomeless]

Ok, i would contribute another 100 EUR for every reasonable effort to sue Moses and his Kirux stuff.

Count me in for another 100 EUR.

This is so upsetting considering the amount of time and energy the developers of SME and the Contribs go through, all for no monetary gain.

Geoffrey

[u27g8mdm]

We are looking into these issues and trying to decide how best to move forward.

Thanks
Garret

Hi,

so how is it coming about ?

[garret]

It is a very slow process, we are dealing with copy rights here.
But we are moving forward.

Garret

[u27g8mdm]

Ok, thanks.
Was just wondering.

[slords]

Also, the Mitel copyrights and some other branding, that some people are mentioned were removed by the development team with the release 6.5 in order to make the SME generic.

As THE developer for 6.5 that you refer to, I have something to say regarding this.  First off I did contact members from mitel and ask their permission/opinion on the best way present a generic manager and still give credit where it was due.  I also didn't EVER claim that I was the author of it.  None of the copyrights in the code were removed.  The way they were displayed in the manager footer was the only thing that changed.  All of the code that Mitel has written very clearly states at the top of each file that they are the author and copyright holder.

-Shad

[kiruxadmin]

....

[pfloor]

Kurixadmin,

Please check your facts before you post.

1-Mitel themselves released 6.0 (and previous versions) to the public (including source code) and left their Mitel Logo in tact for everyone to see.  It was released as a "Unsupported Developer Release" and it was their option to do so.  This was the last version that Mitel released.

2-Mitel gave permission to others to continue development and released it's code and it finally rested at contribs.org.  Mitel gave permission for the mitel logo to be removed but the copyrights were all left in tact as required.  The source code is still available and 6.0.1 was born.  6.0.1 is almost identical to 6.0 and is now branded by contribs.org.  This current contribs.org release DOES NOT have the Mitel banner.

3-Shad Lords changed some of the copyright wording but only AFTER consulting with the proper persons and getting permission.  The copyrights are still there but just worded differently.  He developed 6.5 and released it.

Neither contribs.org or Shad have ever stated anywhere that this entire distribution is copyrighted by them.  They give credit where credit is due.

All of these things were done under the GPL (and other licenses) in the true spirit of the GPL and with Mitel's permission.

Your accusations that others are violating Mitels rights are just not true at all.  If they were, Mitel would not have allowed contribs.org to continue and this site would not exist.  Mitel has plenty of money and would sue everyone involved if they thought there were un-resolved problems.

P.S. You can answer me here.  My full name and email address are none of your business.

[kiruxadmin]

....

[frederikbay]

Where is the account no? I need to deposit my 100 EUR.  

[pfloor]

If documentation is needed for a legitimate reason, I'm absolutely sure it will surface.  Your request to see it is far from a legitimate reason.

You should not concern yourself with what others have and concern yourself with what you NEED, your OWN documentation.

Mitel did in fact PUBLICALY announce the "turning over" of the GPL portion of their code in December 2003.  They made certain "rules" and contribs.org obliged.  Every thing that has happened here at contribs.org is above board.  Any "paperwork" involved was between the parties involved.  If you want to see it, call Mitel and ask them for it, I'm sure they will tell you where to go as well.

Your attempts at TRYING to find problems with copyrighted material HERE will not net you anything.  You must look elsewhere to find that.

I do not post my personal information anywhere for anyone and I will not start posting it here for you, you are not that important so stop asking for it.

[kiruxadmin]

...