Copy Left violation

[TBK]

The Linux kernel is under GNU GPL v2 which has the Copy Left clause.

 

DSM 6 and other version contain a binary version of the kernel and therefor the source code has to be released at the same time as the binary version is made available, not doing so violates the license.

 

I have therefore today written a mail to Synology informing them that they are in violation of GNU GPL v2.

 

I would also like to remind the XPEnology team that XPEnoboot also contains additional modification of the "DSM" kernel and thus also has to be made available alongside the iso, img and vmdk.

[brantje]

What happens if they don't opensource the kernel?

 

 

Posted via Xpenology.us

[TBK]

If they ignore my request I will contact EFF and the Linux copy right holders (Linus and the other kernel developers), they have to option to sue if they want, but I am pretty sure that Synology will comply since they don't want bad press.

[brantje]

And that the open source kernel is not published, prevents xpenology from building a DSM 6 bootloader?

*This is interesting stuff*

 

 

Posted via Xpenology.us

[TBK]

I suspect that is one of the reasons the DSM 6 src is not available yet.

 

Synology also needs to release the modified source code for their official packages that is based on OSS.

[Trantor]

This has been discussed with the dev team few weeks ago.

The next release will have the kernel sources available.

[AllGamer]

And that the open source kernel is not published, prevents xpenology from building a DSM 6 bootloader?

*This is interesting stuff*

 

 

Posted via Xpenology.us

 

The delay is not too surprising.

 

I also help out over at XDA Developers doing Android Hacking and stuff for Android phones ROM / firmwares.

 

It's the same issue with every new release of any major brand, like Samsung, or HTC, etc...

 

They will drag it as long as possible to not release the source code, until their latest version of Android is well distributed (sold) among their indented geographic locations.

By the time they are in the works for the next version, is when they release the sources for the previous version.

 

I'm quite sure Synology doesn't like us "Hackers" pocking at their fruits of labour.

 

But heck, If we did not purchase their original products, we wouldn't even be fan of their stuff.

Personally I own a few Synology boxes, great stuff, the oldest one i have is from way back in 2007 (DS207), the over the years I've picked up a few of the 4 bays model, 5 bays, etc...

 

But as many people here, I simply have waaaaaaay too much old PC cases and motherboards, expansions cards, etc... collecting dust in the basement, so might as well make use of them and build my own XPEnology box.

 

Synology is like Apple, they just have a very nicely and heavily customized FreeBSD under the hood.

 

The team at Synology they also started as fans building a linux based easy to use web interface NAS storage, now they grew too big, and is trying to forget the open source community that helped them grow and become what they are now in days.

 

I'm sure if we really wanted to we can make our own dedicated NAS OS, something like FreeNAS but with the excellent plug in support and GUI like XPEnology

for the longest time I've been running full blown version of linux Fedora + Webmin / Ubuntu + Webmin to maximize hardware support, but as many of you know, when running a full blown linux machine as a file server is just too heavy for some older machines, XPEnology and FreeNAS do much better sometimes, it's more forgiving as the Memory + CPU footprint is less than a full blown linux box, but then the trade off is that not all hardware are supported.

 

I'm hoping as I get more experienced with this project I'll try to help out by pointing out missing hardware support, and learn how to build the .ko driver modules myself to add support for interface cards that might not yet be supported by XPEnology

 

Thanks for all our wonderful Dev & Hackers for making XPEnology possible

 

So much to learn, so little time to do it

[brantje]

Same here, i really like the Synology products, but the prices they ask for the hardware are crazy.

If they would offer somekind of software license that would give the ability to run the software like xpenology, i would insta buy it, and i'm sure many more would do that.

 

 

 

Posted via Xpenology.us

[AllGamer]

Same here, i really like the Synology products, but the prices they ask for the hardware are crazy.

If they would offer somekind of software license that would give the ability to run the software like xpenology, i would insta buy it, and i'm sure many more would do that.

 

 

 

Posted via Xpenology.us

 

Hell yeah, if Synology is smart and offer full support for 3rd party hardware (which is what they do not want to do) and offer the Synology as a NAS OS to be licensed by End Users, I'll be more than happy to buy it from them, just like many of us do with their Camera Licenses.

[jadie]

Same here, i really like the Synology products, but the prices they ask for the hardware are crazy.

If they would offer somekind of software license that would give the ability to run the software like xpenology, i would insta buy it, and i'm sure many more would do that.

 

 

 

Posted via Xpenology.us

 

Hell yeah, if Synology is smart and offer full support for 3rd party hardware (which is what they do not want to do) and offer the Synology as a NAS OS to be licensed by End Users, I'll be more than happy to buy it from them, just like many of us do with their Camera Licenses.

 

Never going to happen. Just like Apple, Synology is making money on selling overpriced hardware.

[quicknick]

I have the kernel source from DSM 6.0 beta 7274. This should be enough to get started while we wait for current source. I was going to test deployment of DSM 6 after I build the kernel.

[quicknick]

I can put the 7274 source up if anyone wants it.

[berwhale]

Never going to happen. Just like Apple, Synology is making money on selling overpriced hardware.

 

When you buy a Synology device, you're buying hardware, software and warranty support. The hardware appears overpriced because you can get the software and 'support' from here for free. Essentially, you're assigning 0 values to software and support in the cost = hardware + software + support equation.

[billat29]

Never going to happen. Just like Apple, Synology is making money on selling overpriced hardware.

 

When you buy a Synology device, you're buying hardware, software and warranty support. The hardware appears overpriced because you can get the software and 'support' from here for free. Essentially, you're assigning 0 values to software and support in the cost = hardware + software + support equation.

 

Well said

[M230]

The source has never been released same time as DSM, this is nothing out of the ordinary.

[TBK]

That might be the case, but it is required by the license so Synology has no choice.

[pigr8]

Never going to happen. Just like Apple, Synology is making money on selling overpriced hardware.

 

that's bullshit.

[abced]

@TBK, did you get any response from Synology?

[TBK]

I got a mail Friday from the UK sales office that confirmed that they had received my request and that they would have inquire internally.

 

I am hoping for an update later today.

[abced]

I think you should send a notice to copyright owners now, if we want to see bootloader before summer before everybody goes to holidays

[TBK]

I got a reply Monday, but I did not have the time to answer it until yesterday.

 

In short the reply said that they were not ready to release the source code and they were working on adding more patches....

[freebsdrules]

And what was your reply? That's such a bs reply from them.

[abced]

I haven't read the license, but I guess, if compiled source is in live production, then open source has to be available.

 

After all, it's not really your job to argue with them. Since they are making big money out of it, I'm sure there is somebody on the copyright holder's side that will be interested to escalate this.

 

 

I see people were having the same problem in the past as well. There are some topics on their forum and people contacting FSF.

[TBK]

My reply was very like my initial mail, reminding them that the license does not allow a delayed release of the source.

 

I will wait a few days to see what they come back with and if nothing good happens I will contact the Linux kernel developers.

[WiteWulf]

Never going to happen. Just like Apple, Synology is making money on selling overpriced hardware.

 

When you buy a Synology device, you're buying hardware, software and warranty support. The hardware appears overpriced because you can get the software and 'support' from here for free. Essentially, you're assigning 0 values to software and support in the cost = hardware + software + support equation.

 

Indeed...and those of you with long memories may recall the brief point in time when you could buy Apple PowerPC clones with officially licensed ROMs and copies of System 7. Apple saw their hardware sales plummet and ended the program within 2 years of it starting. The rest of the hardware industry learned a useful lesson from this!