Discussion GPL discussion tx

Discussion in 'Switch - Backup Loaders & Modchips' started by kamesenin888, Jul 12, 2018.

  1. Yes, GPL is important and tx should be prosecuted and die

    5 vote(s)
  2. No, GPL is bogus for a piracy product and I couldn't care less

    38 vote(s)
  3. Yes, GPL is important and tx should deliver their source code to abide to the law

    30 vote(s)
  4. No, TX should not have to adhere to the GPLv2 license by releasing their source code

    8 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. luca1

    luca1 Member

    May 17, 2018
    To everyone saying its hipocrisy to want to pirate games but get pissed at people making money out of other people's work, remind yourselfs that

    a - pirating a multibillion dollar company is very different from stealing code from hobbyists
    b - most of the developers involved don't like the fact that their work was related to piracy. Something that is breached here
    c - the act of pirating something is more ethical when you share it for free. Asking money for it is way more scummy since you're basically stealing other people's work AND getting paid for it
    UraKn0x, clank and Raugo like this.
  2. Revard

    Revard Member

    Jun 13, 2018
    The GPLv2 is organized into 3 sections:
    Section 1 deals with reproduction and distribution of verbatim copies of the Program’s source code.
    Section 2 deals with modifying the source code.
    Section 3 deals with reproduction and distribution of binary code.

    Not defending TX or anything, but if you take the GPLv2 license strictly:
    Under a plain reading of section 2, if the licensee does not modify the original GPL-licensed program, the Modification Condition and all of its explanatory provisions in section 2 simply do not apply. That leaves sections 1 and 3, governing rights to copy and reproduce in binary or source code forms, neither of which contain any language whatsoever to the effect that merely combining independent works with GPL-licensed code renders the independent works subject to GPL as well.

    Even assuming, that section 2 regulates the licensee even in the absence of modifications, the GPL's inheritance requirements in section 2 apply only to "works based on the Program".
    The GPL defines a “work based on the Program” as
    This definition can only sensibly be construed to mean derivative works as defined by applicable copyright law, and not merely collective works or compilations.
    Under US law, a derivative work is defined under the US Copyright Act as a work that is:
    So if the new work contains the Program or a copy of it, but nothing more – no modifications, recastings or transformations of that original Program – then such work is the functional equivalent of pasting postcard art (linking GPL-licensed code) with ceramic tile (proprietary or non-GPL code).

    TL;DR: As long as there are no modifications to that GPL-licensed program, TX does not have to apply GPLv2 on their work, but have to state that they used the GPL-licensed program.
    Therefore I'm voting for yes and no, because if they modified it, they should abide to GPL – if not, they are OK (with GPL, not with the priacy stuff, that's another topic).
    But as long as TX doesn't provide proof that they didn't modify the copied code...
    Last edited by Revard, Jul 12, 2018
  3. souler92

    souler92 GBAtemp Fan

    Jan 5, 2017
    i know lol but still had to say it
  4. subcon959

    subcon959 teh retro

    Dec 24, 2008
    I didn't know how to respond to this reason directly so I'll do it here. This isn't a topic about a backup loader, that part is original code and is not copied (why would Atmosphere have backup loading code in it for them to copy in the first place) The GPL argument is about the other aspects of SX OS and therefore OFF TOPIC. In fact, it's almost ridiculous to have a GPL discussion in what is basically a piracy subforum.
    Revard likes this.
  5. Goloki

    Goloki GBAtemp Fan

    Nov 24, 2006
    This. Nintendo can get screwed.

    Don't mess with the homebrew community.
  6. TheZander

    TheZander King of the Level 7's

    Feb 1, 2008
    United States
    Level 7
    I always thought people threw in that license stuff for filler to make the code look longer. Has anyone even notified tx of their blunder? I'm sure they're quite embarrassed by all of this and would be glad to rectify it but you guys have to let them know.

    Dear tx,

    This might surprise you etc etc.
    Subtle Demise likes this.
  7. Dabiolos

    Dabiolos Member

    Jan 17, 2018
    According to hex Twitter they did modify it in v1.3 (they removed the easter egg code).

    I really wouldn't care if they developed it ripping Nintendo off (by using leaked SDK files...) or that they used the open source code.

    It's just shitty that they didn't give proper credit at least there should be a little respect in the scene... But that's just my opinion
  8. Shuny

    Shuny I'm in yr forum, reading yr postz

    Nov 15, 2006
    Somewhere in the world
    Is this thread a joke ? Of course breaching the GPL should be a serious offense, but we're talking about a device made to use a security flaw in a console to illegally play downloaded games. It should not surprise you that respecting the law is the last of their concern, and most of the people here are using this product solely for piracy.
    Last edited by Shuny, Jul 12, 2018
  9. nyder

    nyder GBAtemp Fan

    Mar 6, 2014
    United States
    Truth is this doesn't matter. Most the devs don't care that much, so the only people getting butthurt and making a big deal about this is the people who decided not to buy SX Pro/OS for whatever reason and feel the need to defend their decision.
    l915205, MehMeh27 and lukhart like this.
  10. sarkwalvein

    sarkwalvein There's hope for a Xenosaga port.

    GBAtemp Patron
    sarkwalvein is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    Jun 29, 2007
    Yes, GPL is important and TX should either:
    • deliver their source code to abide to the law
    • replace the offending code with their own code so not to break GPL
    In the one hand I would say the latter option may be a more logical choice, but in the other hand we all know they don't care that much to comply with the law anyway, so as much as it makes me respect them a little less, it won't impact their business that much... They should be more frightened due to the new fg invulnerable Switches, and of the homebrew scene which will crack their code and release a free alternative tomorrow! (/s)
    clank likes this.
  11. kamesenin888

    kamesenin888 GBAtemp Maniac

    Oct 20, 2007
    Yes tomorrow ;);), lol and invulberable switchs are starting to go, it not only affects tx, atmosphere too if they are on 5.x+
  12. The14thfly

    The14thfly Advanced Member

    May 14, 2018
    Wait so you're telling me that the pirates who made a cfw that allows you to run pirated games, didn't adhere to an open source license?

  13. Draxzelex

    Draxzelex GBAtemp Psycho!

    Aug 6, 2017
    United States
    New York City
    @Revard Mind taking QuantumCat's suggestion and Pm'ing her? It might be worth your while.
  14. Revard

    Revard Member

    Jun 13, 2018
    Thanks, I overlooked that one! Already PM'd her.
    Quantumcat and Draxzelex like this.
  15. l915205

    l915205 Member

    Jun 28, 2018
    Backup Loader should have Richard Stallman's Seal of Approval to touch my TB collection of perfectly legal backups.

    Anything less is stealing and blasphemy.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice