Well I have played with software (mostly but not exclusively) analytical, and I admire the zeal and energy of both open source and closed source practioners- all having relatively decent people executing strategies their investors or owners tell them to do (closed source) or motivated by their own self sense of cool-change the world-openness (open source)
What I dont get is people stealing open source code- repackaging without adding major contributions- claiming patent pending stuff- and basically making money by creating CLOSED source from the open source software-(as open source is yet to break the enterprise glass cieling)
you are either open source or you arent.
bi- sexuality is okay. bi-codability is not.
Next time you see someone stealing some community’s open source code- refer to this excellent link.
But, we cannot act on our own if we do not hold copyright. Thus, be sure to find out who the copyright holders of the software are before reporting a violation.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html
Violations of the GNU Licenses
If you think you see a violation of the GNU GPL, LGPL, AGPL, or FDL, the first thing you should do is double-check the facts:
- Does the distribution contain a copy of the License?
- Does it clearly state which software is covered by the License? Does it say anything misleading, perhaps giving the impression that something is covered by the License when in fact it is not?
- Is source code included in the distribution?
- Is a written offer for source code included with a distribution of just binaries?
- Is the available source code complete, or is it designed for linking in other non-free modules?
If there seems to be a real violation, the next thing you need to do is record the details carefully:
- the precise name of the product
- the name of the person or organization distributing it
- email addresses, postal addresses and phone numbers for how to contact the distributor(s)
- the exact name of the package whose license is violated
- how the license was violated:
- Is the copyright notice of the copyright holder included?
- Is the source code completely missing?
- Is there a written offer for source that’s incomplete in some way? This could happen if it provides a contact address or network URL that’s somehow incorrect.
- Is there a copy of the license included in the distribution?
- Is some of the source available, but not all? If so, what parts are missing?
The more of these details that you have, the easier it is for the copyright holder to pursue the matter.
Once you have collected the details, you should send a precise report to the copyright holder of the packages that are being misused. The copyright holder is the one who is legally authorized to take action to enforce the license.
If the copyright holder is the Free Software Foundation, please send the report to <license-violation@gnu.org>. It’s important that we be able to write back to you to get more information about the violation or product. So, if you use an anonymous remailer, please provide a return path of some sort. If you’d like to encrypt your correspondence, just send a brief mail saying so, and we’ll make appropriate arrangements.
Note that the GPL, and other copyleft licenses, are copyright licenses. This means that only the copyright holders are empowered to act against violations. The FSF acts on all GPL violations reported on FSF copyrighted code, and we offer assistance to any other copyright holder who wishes to do the same.
But, we cannot act on our own if we do not hold copyright. Thus, be sure to find out who the copyright holders of the software are before reporting a violation.
Related Articles
- iOS beats Android at open source app compliance, says study (linuxfordevices.com)
- The GPL is a License, Not a Contract (groklaw.net)
- Google’s Android faces a serious Linux copyright issue (potentially bigger than its Java problem) (fosspatents.blogspot.com)
- Google accused of violating GPLv2 licensing in Android (linuxfordevices.com)
- The Open Source trials: hanging in the legal balance of copyright and copyleft (visionmobile.com)
- Email To The FSF About WordPress’s GPL License Violations (smackdown.blogsblogsblogs.com)
- More evidence of Google’s habit of GPL laundering in Android: the BlueZ Bluetooth stack and the ext4 file system (fosspatents.blogspot.com)
- Most Android, iPhone apps violate open source rules (macworld.com)
- Android violates Linux license, experts claim (infoworld.com)
- Koha Community Considers Affero License (go-to-hellman.blogspot.com)
- How to avoid public GPL floggings on Apple’s App Store (zdnet.com)
- Ask HN: Open sourcing our product? (news.ycombinator.com)
- Most Mobile Phone Apps Violate Open Source Rules (pcworld.com)
- WordPress Creator GPL Says WP Template Must Be GPL’d (yro.slashdot.org)
- Study: 70 percent of iPhone and Android open source apps violate licenses (infoworld.com)
- Australian Telco Telstra Complies With GPL (news.slashdot.org)
- Hosting Company Appears To Be Violating the GPL (yro.slashdot.org)
2) 
5) Pacman/Njam- Clone of the original classic game. Downloadable from 
6) 
8) Card Games- KPatience has almost 14 card games including solitaire, and free cell. 
9) Sauerbraten -First person shooter with good network play, edit maps capabilities. You can read more here- 
10) Tetris-KBlocks Tetris is the classic game. If you like classic slow games- Tetris is the best. and I like the toughest Tetris game -Bastet 
Even an xkcd toon for it 
DECISION STATS 