101 (edited by sveasoft 2006-03-22 12:06:20)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

To wit -

Should anyone from OpenWRT actually want to solve this issue I am all ears.

Any takers? No? Ok, - "Nazi's". I lost. Oj vey. Godwin save me.

102 (edited by nbd 2006-03-22 12:25:55)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Two possibilities:

a) Publish source code for all of your releases available to subscribers only (if the build system is so problematic for you, then at least make some non-buildable GPL-only tarballs). Every GPL binary should have the corresponding source code on your download site.

b) Make the offer for source code access valid for anyone, even non-subscribers (and for no more than the cost of physically transferring it). Again, you can leave out the 'protected' binaries, I don't care!

From my understanding of the license, these are the two possible options for making your stuff GPL compliant.

103 (edited by sveasoft 2006-03-22 12:47:46)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

if the build system is so problematic for you, then at least make some non-buildable GPL-only tarballs).

We have had a GPL tarball on the subscriber downloads server (GPL only source) for months. I build on average 3-4 source tarballs from scratch monthly when a subscriber requests one.

a) Publish source code for all of your releases available to subscribers only (if the build system is so problematic for you, then at least make some non-buildable GPL-only tarballs). Every GPL binary should have the corresponding source code on your download site.

A single alpha quality developer-snapshot fimware released last week to our Test Group is the only firmware containing OpenWRT modifications.

So if a GPL-only tarball is put up today with the OpenWRT kernel parts included in the latest dev-snaphot will this end the current issue?

[the source build system will still be released - with the next binary release]

Will this solve the current "OpenWRT issue" for the time being?

104 (edited by Ephraim 2006-03-22 14:03:44)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

sveasoft wrote:

I also offered to immediately build a tarball for whatever release rridley/Ephraim claimed he had asked for and was told "no". (He didn't ask and was never told "no", though he was banned from the forums for flamebaiting and threatening me in PM's).

....

Should anyone from OpenWRT actually want to solve this issue I am all ears.

-----------------------

Anyone who wants full source code to public firmware, please see the Downloads link on our forums. The full Alchemy source has been there for months. You can also find most of this source in any DD-WRT source tarball.

Any subscriber who wants a buildable source tarball that will build the exact same firmware image he/she can download as a binary from our Downloads server please PM me on our forums.

....

The Sveasoft forums are a place where politeness and respect for others are not optional. Generally anyone who is posting abusive, flame, or flamebaiting posts is warned once, then shown the door. 99% of the time I also send a full refund of their $20, even though they may have downloaded firmware multiple times and received support for many months. In those few instances a refund is not sent it is because the poster knowingly violated our posting guidelines after a warning with the express intent of a confrontation - as in rridley/Ephraim's case

OK, since I can't post this in the sveasoft forums, but it's obvious James reads these forums... :-)

James, may I have the source code to the binaries I have of Talisman?  -- I'm not sure how much plainer that can get. Of course, since I'm banned on James' whim, I can't PM him.

I also challenge James to show how my posts on sveasoft forum were in any way derrogatory or flame-bait. (As opposed to James' obviously sarcastic and flaimbait comment posted above)

The PM that James refers to is where I responded to his threats of banning stating I still wanted the binaries, and if he banned me after only two weeks, I would seek recourse through PayPal but in any circumstances, I would not keep quiet (meaning I would continue to post polite questions on the forums and keep the issue out in front of people)

105

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

If you do this, then I'll be okay with it:

1) Publish GPL-only tarballs for all of your posted firmware images where you haven't done so already.
2) Accompany all future releases (including developer snapshots) with buildable sources the way you promised.
3) Make sure you stay compliant in the future.

I am not a lawyer, so if you need further advice on the GPL, you should contact one.

106 (edited by sveasoft 2006-03-22 14:40:34)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

3) Make sure you stay compliant in the future

I am not a lawyer, so if you need further advice on the GPL, you should contact one.

As I have stated several times we are already compliant. A case can be made that a unilateral public announcement designed to damage an opponent with no intention of solving a real issue is also prosecutable. Certainly in the USA. Not sure about Germany.

We will bend over backwards again to placate the GPL "community" and release a generic source tarball of our latest developer-snapshot, which does contain some OpenWRT modifications to the kernel.

I hope this quells the GPL "violation" finger wagging for a few months. Certainly it will continue to reappear until we go under or stop charging for access (or both).

As a future suggested course of action -

1) If you suspect there is a problem, contact the other party privately first and ask.

2) If the answer does not satisfy you, suggest a course of action that would.

3) If the other party refuses to compromise or work with you, *then* you may have grounds to go public and try to damage them.

-----------------------------

James, may I have the source code to the binaries I have of Talisman?  -- I'm not sure how much plainer that can get. Of course, since I'm banned on James' whim, I can't PM him.

Send an email to support@sveasoft.com with the exact binary you want source to. I'll build one - not 10, so let's end this charade. One of your PM's was about how much Sveasoft firmware sucked so we both know what this is really about - i.e. you're not going to build firmware with the tarball, this is simply a personal issue.

107

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Ephraim wrote:

OK, since I can't post this in the sveasoft forums, but it's obvious James reads these forums... :-)

James, may I have the source code to the binaries I have of Talisman?  -- I'm not sure how much plainer that can get. Of course, since I'm banned on James' whim, I can't PM him.

I also challenge James to show how my posts on sveasoft forum were in any way derrogatory or flame-bait. (As opposed to James' obviously sarcastic and flaimbait comment posted above)

The PM that James refers to is where I responded to his threats of banning stating I still wanted the binaries, and if he banned me after only two weeks, I would seek recourse through PayPal but in any circumstances, I would not keep quiet (meaning I would continue to post polite questions on the forums and keep the issue out in front of people)

As a sidenote, I wanted to comment on his FUD in his forums (I thought he opened that two threads for everyone up). Surprisingly, my password wasn't the same I've set a year ago or so. It "mysteriously" changed. I've reseted it, tried to login, and next surprise, my access have been revoked from the forum.. To make it even funnier, the next day he firewalled out openwrt.org and my static home ip.
If I would do the same with you "Mr. Ewing" (I am the only one who remembers the series named dallas?) you would be whinning already everywhere about it.

108 (edited by sveasoft 2006-03-22 14:54:45)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

I wanted to comment on his FUD in his forums

Let's keep the FUD here. As I wrote previously we don't allow personal attacks, impolite behavior, or abuse of others on our forums. Your IRC rants are enough to know that your presence on our forums is not to be friendly or helpful.

The FUD stops (stays) here smile

And I have removed the OpenWRT commentaries from our FAQ. OpenWRT is not an issue for Sveasoft. Would be nice if the reverse could be realized as well.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

sveasoft wrote:

Send an email to support@sveasoft.com with the exact binary you want source to. I'll build one - not 10, so let's end this charade. One of your PM's was about how much Sveasoft firmware sucked so we both know what this is really about - i.e. you're not going to build firmware with the tarball, this is simply a personal issue.

At least if I had the source code I might be able to find out why it sucks and make a usable copy for my purposes. Can't do that without the source code and in any case, the GPL doesn't say I HAVE to, it just says I have the RIGHT to. I might just want to inspect the source code to make sure you haven't done anything to comprimize the security of my systems.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Its not like you can do that at all. His 'secret sauce' will still be closed to you

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Since when is GPL compliancy a cow trade? "If I do <foo> will you do <bar> and keep quiet?" Just comply and be done with it. Let the "other side" sort out their own compliance and problems.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Seems very much like James Ewings, would prefer back-room deals, and finding out what is minimum to make people shut up.

@nbd,

referring back to original announcement and first post, does it seem like his offer satisfies the specific OpenWRT points?

113

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

@vincentfox: we'll see if he actually follows up on his offers...

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

contents of e-mail sent to sveasoft

Ephraim wrote:

Subject: request for GPL sources
From: <deleted for public posting>
To: support@sveasoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:05:49 -0700
Message-Id: <1143068749.6083.3.camel@actual.host.modified.for.posting>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sveasoft,

please allow me to access the sources for the latest Talisman
developer-snapshot released on 2006-03-08 and 2006-03-15

Thank you
Ephraim

115 (edited by divefox 2006-03-23 02:52:41)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

If we can't compare James Ewing to Adolf Hitler, can we at least compare him to Darl McBride?  Hey, it would be a new precedent.  In a flamewar involving the GPL, instead of comparing one of the parties to Hitler, you could compare one to McBride.  Reductio ad Darlum.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Nope, Darl's just a big idiot whose name we'll all forget in a few years.

Hitler nobody will every forget.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

vincentfox wrote:

Nope, Darl's just a big idiot whose name we'll all forget in a few years.

Hitler nobody will every forget.

And everyone will have forgot James Ewing in a few months anyhow, which is why I feel comparing him to Darl McBride is more appropriate a comparison.

118

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

sveasoft wrote:

I informed him that any Sveasoft subscriber can request subscriber-only source via a PM to me on our forums and that no one has ever been told "no".

Is that information been publicly announced on sveasoft forum? Guess I have missed that. Why didn't you mention that when various people (including me) were asking "when source code for current version will be available?" ?

sveasoft wrote:

though he was banned from the forums for flamebaiting and threatening me in PM's).

Could you please tell me why I was banned? Please post my message here so that anyone can see why you have banned me.

sveasoft wrote:

Any subscriber who wants a buildable source tarball that will build the exact same firmware image he/she can download as a binary from our Downloads server please PM me on our forums.

I want a buildable source tarball that will build the exact same firmware image, but I am no more able to PM on your forum. As my subscription has not yet expired I am asking you here to give me mentioned source tarball.

sveasoft wrote:

The Sveasoft forums are a place where politeness and respect for others are not optional. Generally anyone who is posting abusive, flame, or flamebaiting posts is warned once, then shown the door.

I think that I was more than polite in my last posting after which you have banned me without any warning! I even told you once (publicly) that if there were no mac limit problems and if sources were available you would never se me posting anything. What more can you ask?!

sveasoft wrote:

99% of the time I also send a full refund of their $20, even though they may have downloaded firmware multiple times and received support for many months. In those few instances a refund is not sent it is because the poster knowingly violated our posting guidelines after a warning

Again, you didn't warn me and didn't respont to my mail after being banned and didn't refund my $20. Not that I am asking for the refund. I had about month and a half of subscription period left so to be correct I have almost spent it. And I do think that you diserve those $20 - not because you gave me priority support (as I don't call waiting for 3 weeks just to have one mac address cleared from the list a support) nor because you gave me couple of upgrades during subscription period (used just major one) but because 1) you had an good idea and people with good ideas should be properly awarded, 2) I am using your firmware.

And, please, don't be surprised by my postings here AFTER you have banned me, not replyed to email to support@sveasoft.com, blocking my access to sveasoft web page, .... As much as I like to offer a loaf of bread to someone who throws a rock on me, I am getting older and older and having less and less of nerves, and I certenly don't wan't others to go through what I have been going with you, so I feel obligated to post my oppinions and feelings here where no one will delete my (IMHO normal, human) message.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Send an email to support@sveasoft.com and specify the binary you want source to. I'll build one custom today and email it over.

As I recall you posted a very emotional flame about the MAC lock system twice and then posted emotional flames about your previous posts having been deleted. I also seem to recall some email exchanges we had.

Anyway - if you want a refund include the request in your email.

120 (edited by dixie 2006-03-23 12:30:57)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

sveasoft wrote:

Send an email to support@sveasoft.com and specify the binary you want source to. I'll build one custom today and email it over.

OK. I will do that. (I will not ask why I have to specify binary when you have all the information in the "black-book" database :-) ) Thank you in advance.

sveasoft wrote:

As I recall you posted a very emotional flame about the MAC lock system twice

Maybe. Maybe not. Memory can trick you. But you certenly did not warn me about that. I am sure that you can understand that two people looking at the same thing/problem/something can have different perception and emotional response so if you don't tell me that you are offended with something you can't be sure I am aware of that. There are so many different cultural, religious, ... variations that one must not assume everyone is the same as he is.

sveasoft wrote:

and then posted emotional flames about your previous posts having been deleted.

If calming down another user by saying that I don't believe that you have deleted messages intentionaly and that it must be a database error is emotional flame - they yes - I am guilty, but I guess that most of the people didn't see it like flaming.

sveasoft wrote:

I also seem to recall some email exchanges we had.

That is a problem with "recall". I seem to recall that we have never exchanged anything via e-mail. I only contacted you via PM and only concerning payment method and one mac removal. I guess with so many users you should not allow your judgement be guided by recall.  If you decide to punish someone be sure you have some evidence. That is why I asked you to display my "flaming" message - I wanted others to verify that it was really so flaming that I deserve to be punished (or not - so my name should be cleared - and I do care about my name, that is why I am not changing it on various forums).

sveasoft wrote:

Anyway - if you want a refund include the request in your email.

Getting money back is less satisfaction for me than you admiting that you have overreacted and mixed me with someone else who was really flaming. It's up to you. You can always reach me by e-mail or PM here (or on your own forum if you let me back in :-) )

Regards.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

I overreacted - send me an email and I'll reinstate the account if you prefer.

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

sveasoft wrote:

The Sveasoft forums are a place where politeness and respect for others are not optional. Generally anyone who is posting abusive, flame, or flamebaiting posts is warned once, then shown the door. 99% of the time I also send a full refund of their $20, even though they may have downloaded firmware multiple times and received support for many months. In those few instances a refund is not sent it is because the poster knowingly violated our posting guidelines after a warning with the express intent of a confrontation - as in rridley/Ephraim's case

-------------------------

James, you are little more than a LIAR and a THIEF !



Well, this was MY experience after posting to linksys.org the following post:

Today, I happened to peruse the Sveasoft website, as I occasionally do, hoping to uncover news of the much anticipated "Hotspot" version of Talsiman. Today, I finally came across some news, though FAR from what I had hoped !

"Talisman/Hotspot will be based on a shared billing model for anyone charging for Hotspot use and an advertising model for anyone offering free access. If you charge, Sveasoft receives 5% of the gross proceeds. If you do not charge we add a small Google banner to the bottom of your splash page. Hopefully folks will find this an acceptable model and Hotspot use will grow rapidly. "

Seems like the ONLY firmware NOT on a "open source" model has once again found a new and exciting way to dip into one's pocket. After a years wait, and having paid $20 for it's "subscription" for firmware of questionable quality, James of Sveasoft has sprung this upon its subscribers with little warning.

Sorry, James.......I believe I will let my subscription to your "site" lapse. Given that there are MULTIPLE FREE versions of firmware, most of which FAR less "buggy" than your version of the firmware......I believe I will migrate to them, rather than waste any more time with YOUR less-than-adequate firmware.


And the Result ? :

Having vented some of my disappointment regarding Sveasoft's efforts to dig even deeper in the pockets of his subscribers regarding his "Business Model" concerning his "upcoming" release of his Talisman/Hotspot......I purused his web site once more today to see if OTHER subscribers had succeeded in changing his mind in this matter: after all, I had purchased a subscription and have a RIGHT to do so, at least until my subscription expires, wouldn't you think ? Evidently, Sveasoft thinks otherwise !

"Your access to Sveasoft has been revoked.
Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information. "


Evidently, James of Sveasoft seems to feel he has some sort of God-given right to censor discussion not only on HIS site, but also the right to censor discussion on OTHER Web sites ! In doing so, he evidently ALSO feels he has some sort of right to STEAL peoples money without repercussion or consequence.

Well, all I can say, James : If I can discourage even ONE person from falling victim to your style of theft, by posting on this site and others....... Well, that makes that loss of $20 well worth it, don't you think, James

123 (edited by vincentfox 2006-03-24 00:11:12)

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

Well, it is his website. However we feel about his relatively childish behaviour for a businessman, he is free to kick you out of his treehouse. If you refuse to don the Cape of Obeisance, and say the Secret Oath, you can be forever banished.

Venting here makes you feel better, but it's preaching to the choir. I'd request a refund if I were you.

I'm rather more concerned about his business practices and GPL compliance. Also this whole business where he keeps trying to have it every way that is convenient at the moment is troubling. I believe when he booted Ephraim, the Paypal denial of refund stated software had been sold & shipped to the person so refund denied. Which is at odds with the claim that no software is sold, only access to support forums.

It's all just increasingly difficult to put together in a sensible way. James statements sound like the GPL is the Mark of the Commie Beast.  I wonder why if it's such anathema to him, he did not base his work on VxWorks OS or something else commercially licensable instead of Linux and GPL code. That would have been much more inline with his apparent philosophy, and would be much easier to support a simple buy-my-amazing-firmware model.  If you truly believe that software developers deserve unending profits for their work, then logically you should only base your own work on licensed and proprietary OS.  To use OSS/GPL as a software base, implies supporting Karl Marx.  Some people think "free" just means you don't have to pay for it. They miss either through ignorance or blindness, that "free" in the OSS/GPL world means there may be some baggage if their intention is other than keeping it "free".

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

vincentfox wrote:

Well, it is his website. However we feel about his relatively childish behaviour for a businessman, he is free to kick you out of his treehouse.

Actually, I don't believe that's QUITE the case....He is NOT free to "kick me out of his treehouse" simply because I vented a complaint in ANOTHER web forum....I PAID for a service....I EXPECT that service !

If he had stated in his "terms of service" when I CONTRACTED with him for membership in his "subscriber forums" that I was not permitted to express dis-satisfaction on his, or ANY other web site, I would not have entered into the agreement in the FIRST place !

Would YOU sign an purchase agreement when you purchase that new Ford Mustang you had your eye on...that you would NEVER publicly complain about the vehicles flaws ? Of COURSE you would not ! What makes you think I would ?


SECOND, my "complaint" here is ENTIRELY in reaction to Jame's line of bullcr*p quoted previously :

sveasoft wrote:

The Sveasoft forums are a place where politeness and respect for others are not optional. Generally anyone who is posting abusive, flame, or flamebaiting posts is warned once, then shown the door. 99% of the time I also send a full refund of their $20, even though they may have downloaded firmware multiple times and received support for many months. In those few instances a refund is not sent it is because the poster knowingly violated our posting guidelines after a warning with the express intent of a confrontation - as in rridley/Ephraim's case

Posting on a DIFFERENT forum is HARDLY  a violation of his "posting guidlines", given that he is not ENTITLED to restrict content in other forums with his "posting guidlines"

Therefore......by NOT fufilling his commitment to me , purchased  by virtue of my $20...... MAKES him a thief !

NEVER did I violate his "posting guidlines" On HIS site in any way, shape, or form !

I CHALENGE you, James......Provide ONE shred of evidence that I violated your "posting guidelines" !

Re: Unbelievable (Sveasoft)

I understand you are upset, however no need to use lots of caps and exclamation marks with me, really.  What is the actual wording of the agreement when you subscribe? Both of you are probably paraphrasing the actual statement.