PearPC seeking funding to sue CherryOS

What is it about pretty much anything involving Apple and lawsuits? This time they're not directly involved (yet), but I'm sure they're amused to witness two rival Mac OS X emulator developers go head to head over their respective codebases. The makers of PearPC are seeking funds to support a lawsuit against the developers of CherryOS because of allegedly stolen code (did they steal it? Magic 8-ball sez "signs point to yes"). PearPC's code is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), which does allow for free use of the code, but expressly forbids offering that codebase up for sale without passing along the same rights granted to you, and providing the modified source code to the public. Because CherryOS took the code and (allegedly…) lied about its use in a commercial, for-profit product, PearPC is seeking to sue them for violation of the GPL. Somehow the 'War of the Fruits' just doesn't have much of a ring to it.

Update: Yes, as several of you pointed out, there was a glaring omission in this post that now stands corrected. Please accept our apologies and note that this is what happens when posting sleep-deprived after being up all night preparing the day's How-to! Thanks.

[Ichi @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

I'm all for PearPC in this one and I'm fairly sure they'll win it. It's so obvious; the CherryOS guys even included the spuriously-named variables in PearPC. Really spurious. Like 'Spiro Multimax 5000'.

I've used PearPC 0.4pre with Altivec (G4 emulation) and it's pretty impressive...not good for much as the timer's all messed up...but it's stil quirky seeing Finder running on my old Toshiba notebook. And it's free!

[Kenny @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

The GPL says nothing about not being able to sell software, it's about re-distributing without providing the source code, which is required by the GPL.

Take that and the fact they are lying about even using the PearPC source code to begin with.

Read about how it's pretty obvious below

http://www.ht-technology.com/cherryos-pearpc/cherryos-pearpc.html

[Seva @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

There are some serious misunderstandings of the GPL in this post.

It statest that GPL ... "expressly forbids offering that codebase up for sale"

That's not the case, under the GPL you are free to sell the code to anyone you wish, as long as you pass along the rights granted to you (i.e. free access to the modified or unmodified source code).

Take a look at this page for more information:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#GPL

[TheZodiac @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

If they cant AFFORD to sue them on their own... then they just need to cry in the corner and shit up.

[Myke @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

You (Barb, editors, whoever) might want to post a firm correction real quick-like about the whole GPL thing, else you're likely to get roasted alive by trigger-happy flamethrower-toting geeks.
On a more practial note, Barb seems to have a mis-understanding of the contentiousness of copyright violations (which is what this is a case of), especially as viewed by the respective copyright holders. With regards to the GPL, I think she may want to take the effort to quickly peruse this page:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

[Jeff @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

Have a feeling this post will get updated with a correction on the GPL at some point...

but yeah, the issue is the lying about the code, and the failure to offer up the source (which is a GPL violation). Of course, the reason they're not offering up the source is because then everybody would *see* that they're basically just re-packaging PearPC... in which case, why would anybody pay for CherryOS?

I think it's important that everybody here understands one of the basic tenets of the GPL, which is that the original code writers *retain their copyright*. Anyone who breaks the GPL is doing the same thing as someone who pirates music or movies - they are violating copyright. The code is being offered up by the copyright holders under a specific license, and it is not anybody's right to use that code under any other circumstances but as dictated by that license. You don't give up your copyrights just because you write some GPL code, and the CherryOS dude could be sued by any and all copyright holders involved in writing this code.

Just wanted to clarify what's going on, since some people have this idea of the GPL as some sort of communist manifesto; it certainly is not that. It exists to *protect* the copyrights of those who wrote the original code. (Versus just dumping a bunch of code out into the public domain, which is what the CherryOS people apparently think GPL code is.)

[gorkon @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

CherryOS CAN sell the code, but they must also make the source code available. GPL does nto forbid selling open source software....otherwise Red Hat, IBM and Novell are all guilty of the same thing.

[tf @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

Uhhh... You're getting hammered with it... but, Jesus, I really thought a site like this would understand the GPL by now... Will we ever learn?

[Bruce @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

Remember the GPL is coercive about forcing you to do things. The GPL is free as in NOT FREE. The BSD license is about FREEDOM to do whatever you want with the code.

[spicytuna @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

Why anybody would want to emulate Mac OSX on a PC is beyond me. Maybe except for testing purposes but commercial products would be best tested on native environments.

[ming @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

i hope they get their asses sued off.

http://www.mingisback.com

[slyrobber @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

Can't they just get along? Pathetic !!

[Randy @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

I think they got it by now folks, no need to keep on pointing out they made a mistake about the GPL anymore (Aka, read before posting)

As for crying if they cant afford to sue.. Bill Gates, stop using an alias and just show yourself!

[Indramin Darmadi @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

PearPC dan Cherry OS is not an "OSX Emulator", rather it is a "PowerPC" processor emulator.
With PearPC, it is possible to install PowerPC's version of Linux.

From PearPC's FAQ http://wiki.pearpc.net/index.php/FAQs#What_is_PearPC.3F

"PearPC is a PowerPC emulator for x86 computers. You can emulate a PPC system so that you can run GNU/Linux for PPC, Mac OS X, and other OSes for PPC on x86. PearPC can be run under Windows, Linux and BeOS (only 0.2.0 generic version)."

[LD @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

FYI, PearPC is NOT an OS X emulator. It is a PowerPC emulator. Let's make that clear. It can be used to install OS X, it can also be used (and has been) to install Linux, Unix, or any other PowerPC OS.

CherryOS is advertising it as an OS X emulator, a clear violation of the Apple EULA. PearPC does not describe themselves as an OS X emulator, only a PowerPC emulator that has worked with OS X.

[Joe Cheng @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

>> Remember the GPL is coercive about forcing you to do things. The GPL is free as in NOT FREE. The BSD license is about FREEDOM to do whatever you want with the code. <<

GPL is about ensuring freedom for end-users, at the expense of freedom for developers. It makes it hard for a developer to take away the freedoms of the end-user.

[iceberg @ Dec 19th 2005 1:22AM]

"Remember the GPL is coercive about forcing you to do things. The GPL is free as in NOT FREE."

BZZZ! WRONG!

Being subject to the restrictions of a GPL license is voluntary, not coercive. The choice is yours; if you want to use GPL'ed code, you have to agree to make available any and all changes to the source code.

You can choose not to use the code, or you can choose to use it and accept the restrictions. Something can only be described as coercive if you never accepted either choice, and are still left holding the bag. For example- taxes, government, (immoral) wars, economic interventionism and much, much more.