[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-discuss] Help needed - LGPL Violation and Legal Threats
From: |
Chloride Cull |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-discuss] Help needed - LGPL Violation and Legal Threats |
Date: |
Mon, 03 Nov 2014 09:45:26 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 |
address@hidden ~/Downloads]$ strings nucore | grep qemu
/usr/local/share/qemu
/tmp/qemu-smb.%d
/etc/qemu-ifup
[qemu]
show the version of qemu
show kqemu information
kqemu support:
(qemu)
activate logging of the specified items to '/tmp/qemu.log'
qemu: Unsupported NIC: %s
qemu: unsupported keyboard cmd=0x%02x
qemu ...
qemu.wav
/tmp/qemu.log
qemu: fatal:
/dev/kqemu
kqemu_flush_page: addr=%08x
kqemu_flush:
kqemu: cpu_exec: enter
kqemu: interrupt v=%02x:
Version mismatch between kqemu module and qemu (%08x %08x) - disabling
kqemu use
kqemu_set_notdirty: addr=%08lx
kqemu: exception v=%02x e=%04x:
kqemu: kqemu_cpu_exec: ret=0x%x
It most certainly looks like qemu from running strings on it.
AFAIK it should be enough evidence, but IANAL. Can't really prove it is
a derivative that easily without access to both sources ;)
On 11/02/2014 03:26 AM, Tom Cain wrote:
> G'day QEMU wizards,
> I've recently been made aware of an organization that seems to be pretty
> actively sending out nastygrams to people who redistribute their software
> which is a QEMU derivative.
> It was my understanding that current versions of QEMU full system emulation
> are GPL, and older versions (0.8.1) were LGPL.
> The executables that this company distributes are not distributed with the
> source, and the company has refused to release the source code upon request,
> and has threatened legal action to all of those who host these files on their
> websites.
> My binary analysis shows that this is QEMU-0.8.1, can anyone confirm?
> http://bigguyspinball.com/nucoresupport.shtml
>
> If so, it appears that this website is committing copyright infringement by
> violating the terms of the LGPL.
>
> Any insight would be appreciated! I've communicated with the FSF and the
> Software Freedom Conservancy, and they agree that hypothetically it is a
> violation. I just need someone to confirm that the contents of that linux
> binary are QEMU. From the looks of it, if this company is filing lawsuits, it
> puts a MAJOR damper on the open source community, so any help is appreciated.
> Thank you all!
> Tom
>