Originally Posted by hawaii (Post 866390)

You said it right there, purchased ACCESS to the beta. Not purchasing source code, not purchasing binary packages and not paying for licensing.

A donation was made and access to a private closed-doors project was provided. If no more tools, ports, drivers or similar projects are ever publicly announced - you know why.

There's a reason people, me included, have not created [ANNOUNCE] threads for every application port, source mod or hack made to the N900. The community takes it, runs with it - some asshat breaks or doesn't understand it - and the author is left holding the bag.

Sorry, but if you can't figure it out for yourself, you probably have no right in the first place.

Originally Posted by Ele-Mental (Post 866924)

So whats the status of the project today?

Originally Posted by hawaii (Post 866423)

It's a closed project. It's a beta. It was privately provided to users. Wanna know the selection process?

1). If you donated, you'd get it.

2). If you were a useful contributor to the project, you'd get it.

3). If you did neither, you'd get it, eventually, for completely free.

This is like some Red Hen **** going on here.

Originally Posted by hawaii (Post 866423)

If you donated,

Originally Posted by Mentalist Traceur (Post 866305)

Well, the thing is unless someone bothers to bring a legal challenge against NeoPwnv2 as a violation of the GPL, I don't see the questions being answered. I think he's made himself a lot of room to maneuver. The release is "postponed indefinitely", which can still be re-explained as "there's unresolved problems", no one bought anything, like you said (though him using "beta proceeds" in saying that the donation total doesn't reflect beta proceeds, combined with him having a "store" and a set donate amount to get access to the beta, frankly, is pretty damn similar in function to "buying" that a good enough lawyer in a reasonable enough court should be able to easily win that argument).

But my concern with these legal issues getting answered is that the only angle of attack is arguing that no matter what you call it, it was basically a "purchase" of access to the beta. And unless someone's willing to take that to court, gets a lawyer who feels they can win from that angle, and finds a court that will take the case on those grounds, it's a bit iffy as to whether or not the legal questions regarding licensing/legality will ever get answered.

Originally Posted by ivyking (Post 861788)

If he wants to maintain a profit , fine , don't make the source publicly available , but people who paid you for the beta , and got the binaries from you , have the legal right to get the source code too.

If someone is doing something wrong here it's neopwn crew, and should be reported to FSF .

here :
Telephone: +1-617-542-5942
Fax: +1-617-542-2652

and http://www.fsf.org/about/contact/email , select gpl compliance lab ..

if many people complain , they may do something !