http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:HIEn-s_ON3EJ:slashdot.org/article.pl%3Fsid%3D05/07/06/1953229+gizmoproject+site:slashdot.org&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
Open Standards != Open source
(Score:5, Interesting)
by l2718 (514756) on Wednesday July 06, @05:13PM (#12997839)
Having competing standards and companies in the field will make for better services for the users. Open standards are great, since they improve interoperability and reliability. For example, people can writing their own clients, etc.
However, the project is not open-source. At least, their about us [gizmoproject.com] page doesn't mention it. They only say:
At the core of Gizmo Project is a commitment to open standards
Methinks someone at the Register got confused. Those other clients written may be open-source or even free software, but the client they offer surely isn't. Their server software is not even offered for download (nor should it necessarily be -- that's what they want to make the money off, of course).
Don't let anyone snooker you out of your freedom.
(Sc(Score:5, Informative)
by jbn-o (555068) on Wednesday July 06, @07:34PM (#12998916)
(»
digitalcitizen.info/)
The license for Gizmo Project software [gizmoproject.com] is quite clear, the software doesn't even qualify for the weaker standard of "open source" (weaker than "free software" which requires that the user have permission to make private derivatives):
License Restrictions
You may not reproduce or distribute the Software for any purpose whatsoever. Without limiting the foregoing, you may not copy the Software to any server or location for reproduction or distribution. You may not reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the Software. The restrictions contained herein apply equally to any updates that may be provided to you by SIPphone.
The company offers what they call "Opensource support" [gizmoproject.com], which appears to be little more than name-dropping. But I expect people around here to know better than to take on faith whatever a proprietor says.
At the very least, even if there is no intention to bamboozle users into adopting the software, this is yet another use of the term "Opensource" which shows how people don't understand what that term means. Reminiscent of examples of same from the FSF essay on the differences between the free software and open source movements [gnu.org] (examples include Neal Stephenson's writing, the State of Kansas' definition, and a particularly interesting example from a trade show in late 1998).
As a result of a little digging into Project Gizmo, I still see no real competition for GNOMEMeeting. I see one more proprietor asking me to install a mysterious program on my computer so that the proprietor can do something on my computer that I am prohibited from inspecting, sharing, or modifying.
