Open-Source Projects Are Getting Ripped On Amazon

[Micket]

This is a comedy goldmine

About "Photo Studio"

* Fully Licenced, 100% Legal Software - No Demo's!!
* Scalable vector graphics (SVG) drawing tools.
* Advanced text support that allows you to add text in a variey of formats including: Multi-line text (SVG 1.0/1.1 )
* Node editing: moving nodes and Bezier curve handles
* Convert tapes and records into digital recordings or CD's

Multi line text?!?! HOLY SHIT! And node editing? Impressive stuff!
Convert tapes...... what? I certainly didn't know Inkscape did that!

[francois]

GnuCash as "Small Business & Personnel Finance Manager"
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...D%20Trade%20UK

Ardour as "Music/Audio Editing Tool-kit"
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...D%20Trade%20UK

PDF Creator as "Create Your Own PDF"
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...D%20Trade%20UK

DVD Flick as "DVD Studio"
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...D%20Trade%20UK

*cough* crook *cough*

[Michael]

This is a comedy goldmine

About "Photo Studio"


Multi line text?!?! HOLY SHIT! And node editing? Impressive stuff!
Convert tapes...... what? I certainly didn't know Inkscape did that!

Indeed! I didn't notice the 'convert tapes' line until now for Photo Studio! Yet Amazon will kick Wikileaks but not these people? Ah well, comedy hour

[Markore]

Actually it is a great idea.
GPL and BSD licensed software can be sold. (With publicized source changes)

One can just take care about brand name rights, logos and work not covered with same license that comes along with products.
And sell will be there.

Only thing someone selling a new named product, neeeds to provide is: Support
And that is where well-established project teams that actually develop software comes first.
So it is not bad to sell free software, just do it right and legally and do contribute to developers, both financially and with code/enhancements.
That way one can be profitable and be constructive at the same time.

[deanjo]

"You can distribute Orbiter, but you are not allowed to charge a fee for it."

How about actually quoting the actual wording,

"You are allowed to distribute Orbiter, as long as you do not charge any fee for the software or distribution without explicit permission by the licensor."

Given those terms, it is possible that they did get explicit permission. I'm not saying that is necessarily the case, but without some response from the orbiter guys one can't assume that it is a violation of terms.

[RealNC]

How about actually quoting the actual wording,

"You are allowed to distribute Orbiter, as long as you do not charge any fee for the software or distribution without explicit permission by the licensor."

Given those terms, it is possible that they did get explicit permission. I'm not saying that is necessarily the case, but without some response from the orbiter guys one can't assume that it is a violation of terms.

Ha ha, given what other stuff they try to sell there, I highly doubt that!

[deanjo]

Ha ha, given what other stuff they try to sell there, I highly doubt that!

Well innocent until proven guilty I say. I'll leave the guilty until proven innocent views to China.

[RealNC]

Phoronix is not a court of law. I *think* they're guilty for a good reason, you think they're not for no particular reason.

Everyone has opinions

[eriktorbjorn]

I wonder if this is the same "Butterfly Media" who used to peddle old software through eBay sellers. Someone I know bought an old DOS game from one of those, expecting - or at least hoping for - a genuine copy. He told me that what he got what a disc with a couple of different games on it and that he could even tell which particular "abandonware" web site some of them had been downloaded from.

It's been quite a while since I saw one of those eBay listings now. (Not that I've been looking for them.) They used to be easily recognizable, because whoever the seller was and whatever the item was, there was almost always a picture of a DVD keep case with an appropriate cover, a hand holding a disc, and a disclaimer that the picture was for illustration purposes only and might not be what the actual item looked like.

[blackiwid]

As far as I read the comments now it looks like a Scam and they maybe don´t respect all lisences or claim software to do stuff which they do not?

But in generall I think that is not only legal (with gpl software) its legitim and also a good thing. Why because more people can use good Software. If they are not trusting software thats for free (beer), let them pay for it. And as a company or a person, you could easily earn money with unethical stuff, doing that is not unethical.

I would think it would be better to give some money to the projects (but thats often no company but lets say the guy who pays the hosting for the website ^^). But its also ok to not do that.

Often people only put some value to Stuff it did cost something, if its free it can´t be good or its a scam or something like that most people think like that.