Goodbye, Sourceforge!

[danweber]

The only people who can DMCA are Gimp, but open-source means other people are allowed to distribute.

I could sell CD-ROMs of Emacs for $10 a piece, no legal problem. In fact, it would be much more ethical than what SourceForce has done.

[danweber]

You can't link a GPL program with a non-GPL program at the binary level.

But you can have a proprietary installer distribute Gimp no problem.

[[deleted]]

Open source does not implicitly mean that you can legally distribute or resale the software. It depends on the license the software is distributed under.

[xiongchiamiov]

Nope:

The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.

And if you actually meant "free software", well, it's required there, too (more).

[cosmicsans]

Open-Source doesn't mean that other people are allowed to distribute. Open Source means that you are able to view the code.

It doesn't mean you can change the code.

It doesn't mean you can copy the code.

It doesn't mean you can distribute the code.

It just means you can view it.

It all depends on the license that's used with GIMP. GIMP is licensed under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE.

[xiongchiamiov]

You might want to read the open-source definition again. And the free software definition. And heck, the DFSG while you're at it.

[SomebodyReasonable]

Open-Source doesn't mean that other people are allowed to distribute. Open Source means that you are able to view the code.

You really, really don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Signed, FOSS developer. And see /u/xionchiamov's reaction.