We still come back around to the problem that the GPL says if you modify GPL code you have to offer to distribute source to anyone that the binary is available to.  His code is being used by people, to whom the source has been refused not just in part, but in total, since July 2005.  That coupled with allegations that recent code may have included new work by other GPL projects without source offered, or attribution to original authors, sounds pretty serious to me.  I mean after all, authors of free software don't ask for very much of you other than that you respect their work.  In a meritocracy, taking someone's ideas and pretending they are yours is not a small matter.

(Last edited by vincentfox on 17 Mar 2006, 07:29)

Agreed.  The community that helped sveasoft take off in the first place has all but vanished as of late.  Even a year after it went subscription only, the project still retained a decent amount of momentum and interest.  Now that pretty much all the notable developers/contributors have left (nikki, wolf, and lonewolf come to mind), it leaves james alone to manage support and coding (both of which he seems to be mediocre at).

GPL'd or not, the fact that he's been withholding source this long is still a rather big put-off to the development community.  For example, the sveasoft UPnP code is an utter piece of trash, and it's pretty common to see port forwards inserted after the "DROP" in firewall rules.  Even while paying $20/year for "premium" support, I would have had no problem combing through UPnP code myself to see what's happening.  Under the current system, the best that I could hope for involves repeatedly bitching on the forums and hoping for a reply other than "it works for me!"

Seem pretty simple to me how to put an end to the Sveasoft GPL infringement.

First obtain an injunction against Sveasoft for distribution of GPL covered software.  This will have to be done by a copyright holder.  That is why my suggestion of the FSF and gpl-violations earlier.

If this is done through the FSF or any other leagal group in the US, obtain a second injuction to stop Paypal from sending him money for software that is illegally being sold.   It may be possible to force a refund for all illegal sales in the past.

Since he is not in the US, keeping him from opening other pay methods is diffacult.  Stopping all US sales and seeking refunds for US citizens however is possible.

Ok, unless you're an attorney this is not so simple.  I am not an attorney so I can't help much there.

Where is he?

(Last edited by Craven on 17 Mar 2006, 22:33)

That assumption was from an old memory from his forums.  A traceroute to www.sveasoft.com ends on telia.net.  I went to www.telia.net and found TeliaSonera.  They appear to be in several countries in Europe.

There is another approach I just read about in the gpl-violations mailing list archive.  Once a cease and desist order has been sent and ignored,  send a take down notice to his ISP since the website is distributing copyright infringing material.

I'm sure with a litte bit of looking on the net, a good examples of legally binding cease and desist notices can be found without the cost of an attorney.

According to a Robert X. Cringley article I read some time ago, he lives on an island somewhere off the coast of Sweden.

Does anyone have any fun with this project anymore? Where is the innovation gone? Just license&law stuff anymore... If we we go on like this, this will be the end of this great project.....

I am having a lot of fun with OpenWRT and DD-WRT right now. Also plan to play with HyperWRT just for fun.

Software has a lifecycle even under best of circumstances. C'est la vie.

Wow, one topic out of 4661  about legal issues and you come to this conclusion - fascinating

(Last edited by cabo on 18 Mar 2006, 00:03)

The GPL is the key to great projects like this. 

To me it is fun to experiment with the code and what amazing things can be done with a $50 - $100 piece of hardware.  Thanks to OpenWRT I am doing more with a $100 router than I could do with a $1000 computer of 6 to 10 years ago.

There is also an element of enjoyment to seeing that what was meant to be free stays free.  In this case it takes legal battles to keep freedom of the code alive.

To me, "fun" is generally a function of community effort and support.  By systematically driving off contributors and denying access to source code, james has effectively turned sveasoft into a one-man show.  That's not to say innovation in his firmware is gone, but as a result of him being the only one working on it, things go really slowly.

Conversely, places like OpenWRT or DD-WRT seem to keep the community spirit alive by treating users as something more than just a mindless source of revenue.

Update: James has told me that he has never refused access to the source code to anyone asking for it.

The GPL leaves two options for source code distribution:

    a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
    source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
    1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange;
or,

    b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
    years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
    cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
    machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
    distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
    customarily used for software interchange;

The complete corresponding source code is not available on the web site (the one published there is very old).
Are the claims wrong, that several people have asked for the source and have not received it?

(Last edited by nbd on 19 Mar 2006, 18:40)

I asked them sometime ago and he posted it in the private section for subscribers with access to the beta section - so for me, no issue.

I remember sometime ago when he didn't provided it because of time though. But that's another story.
At least he won't charge sending a CD with sources for 20 bucks or so.

tamerlane : sveasoft is no more a one man project, there are other developpers participating (wolf for example) - although not giving the sources out don't eas that at all.
They for sure don't share the same open source spirit as most here do - they run a business, make money (both of which could be OK - see mysql ab) and don't release their developments in an open license.

I have requested the source code and have not only been denied it, I have been kicked off and banned from his forum only two weeks after he charged me for a YEARS subscription because I questioned what exactly a "legitimate" request was. When he sent me a warning to remain quiet, I told him I would not. Now I am in the process of "conflict resolution" with sveasoft and PayPal and he is claiming that he has completely fullfilled his contract with me.

Heh, when he asked me today to name a subscriber that asked for source and didn't get it, I named you.
He claims that you have never requested the source and were banned, because you were just flaming in his forum...
Good luck trying to get your money back!

Well, I did ask, and he beat around the bush on the answer. He didn't directly answer, but did not provide the source. Also, I'm not sure you could call any of my posts flaming. I was pretty careful in how I worded them.

Can't say I didn't expect this

Not so...
According to the forums:
wolf          Last Visit:     15 Nov 2005
lonewolf    Last Visit:     06 Dec 2005
nikki:        Last Visit:     11 Jul 2005

I suppose the more notable contributors to the project are all taking a break, eh?

I might add that none of my posts actually got me banned. They were WAAYY to mild to justify that. What got me banned was my answer in private message to him that I would not remain quiet on the issue :-)

According to his post, Wolf isn't a member any more.
http://www.wrt54g.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=565

Well, I didn't followed what was going on since a while then

Stardust : interesting post, allas I'm not surprised much by this ...
I saw many peoples getting banned for lame stuffs, some of those being asking for sources and citing GPL (posts are erased quickly after) - an acting which is not appropriate from a serious company.
As someone said, Sveasoft is a one man project now, and management is more like a dictatorship than a modern company (speak about a touchy point -> get kicked).

The stuff is, they have a nice firmware, development versions are nice, stable, simple (good UI, easy setup) and have cool features and I still continue to play with those alongside with OpenWRT.

NB : Wouldn't be fun to get banned from sveasoft.com for that posting

(Last edited by MathieuM on 20 Mar 2006, 10:52)

Can you ask him why did he banned me?  I am dieing to hear his explanation ....  :-)
Other banned people at least got explanation - why, I didn't.
My last message was far from flaming - on the contrary, I was trying to calm someone ...
Maybe he doesn't like colour of my skin, or my nationality, or my religion, or .... size of my shoes ?!
Nevertheless, as a paying subscriber to support he could forbid me posting on the forum (if my messages were improper) but he certenly should not have limited my access to firmware download and/or contacting him directly (e.g. pm).

Sorry, can't ask him. I'm on his ignore list now.

I agree.  I'm a bit more neutral I think about the whole subject just because I do wish that there were a working profitable model that could be had that could generate a reasonable industry in 3rd party firmware, and it seems he's come to closest to realizing such a thing.  For a one man biz, I would guess he's made a whole ton of cash, as he seems to have gotten a lot of pub early on.  I'm still a subscriber but will undoubtedly let my membership lapse after it seemed like six months went by without a new firmware release, and openwrt has unquestionably improved tremendously imho this past year.  I still think he's doing some good things that i haven't seen anywhere else, like providing firmware for the belkin F5D8230-4  pre-N router, a router that if i owned i would likely keep my subscription for. 

I do think there is a place for a profit model since there is a certain faction what prefers a subscription model because of the support they provide.  Not everyone has a linux background, or even the impetus to want to pick up what they need to in order to run openwrt.  There's enough people that run windows out there that imo would easily fall into this group (although i realize plentry of exceptions, but generally speaking) that aren't knowledgeable of networking but would like support setting up a wireless network in their livingroom to stream audio/video for instance.

Since i don't know the particulars of what code was and wasn't used that james has compiled into his binaries but hasn't released source for, i'm certainly not qualified to speak on him or this particular case.  I'm just against the massive backlash that i have seen a great deal of regarding his profiting from from software written in linux.  Had the code been original, I think that such production should be encouraged rather than causing him to be ostracized as he has, and i've from this I'm speaking of what I witnessed a few years ago before any of the current controversy this thread has touched upon.  My personal opinion is that I hope that there can be a profitable model in 3rd party firmware to encourage more released, production, and standardization in this area which of course would provide more options and better products for you and me as the consumer.

The problem is, as Eric Raymond says, most people incorrectly think of software as something that comes in a box.  Most companies all the way up to IBM who are successful in the software biz, sell their service and support, not the CD in a box.  I make money customizing and supporting solutions, not hidden lines of code.

To put it in cooking terms, I like watching Emeril sometimes.  One show he went over how to make his "Essence" spice like it was no big deal. It doesn't mean people don't still buy Emeril's Essence in a bottle on the grocery shelf, I still do.  Keeping secret recipes is the mark of an insecure cook IMHO.

There are plenty of workable models for open-source software.  I don't think that James Ewing actually had such a terrible idea of a paid subscription for a support forum. The problem came when he started attempting to assert control of the code itself, the MAC-locking junk is one symptom of that cancer.  Things began to deteriorate rapidly after that.

(Last edited by vincentfox on 20 Mar 2006, 23:26)