Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

If we are talking about Maemo/Meego/Meltemi sources, Nokia Technologies own them :)
My source: ex-Nokia employee who worked with harmattan

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

The question remains: why can't someone (for example, your source :)) just leak them?

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

well, leaks are immoral, heh :p
Look at Snowden, and the bad rep given to Wikileaks lately...

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Of course they are! So is a lot of other things.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

I hope your smiley meant you are joking, but the wording lets me doubt it. Don't confuse immoral with illegal.

What Snowden did was in no way immoral. He exposed the wrongdoings of the NSA. The case with Wikileaks is similar.
These people are heroes, they sacrifice, or at least risk, their personal freedom just for the chance to stop these wrongdoings.

Its like saying a guy who exposes a group of human traffickers acted immorally because he exposed his working colleagues.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Morality, like truth, is not something universal, hanging in the air. It is subjective and depends on where you stand. For some, Snowden "exposed NSA's wrongdoings". For others, he "threatened national security".

Regarding the topic of this thread, I know that some people believe that sacrificing anything and everything on the altar of their open-source god is never immoral but the truth is that the sources are Nokia's intellectual property and it is up to Nokia and Nokia alone to decide whatever they damn please with them, however inconvenient it might be for you. Making that decision for Nokia and leaking them would be not only illegal but also immoral.

But, as I say, so are a lot of other things.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

ach!
gone are the good old days....
when something "immoral"
was actually something fun ...

now the definition has morphed into.....
ach!
I don't even know what to call it now...

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

It would have to be the janitor. I guess nobody else gets down to the basement with cobwebs where the old backup tapes are being forgotten...

Even for N900 PR 1.3.1 (the final one that just updated some certs) Nokia had to restore the source from backup tapes. That leaves good hopes for the whereabouts of the Maemo/MeeGo sources. ;)

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Get over it.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

This forum is testament to how unlikely that would be.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Leaking the sources is a very bad idea in my opinion.

So you read them, then what? Every bit of code you write after that could be tainted from what you've read. You risk being sued if someone finds any similarities between your code and the stolen code. None of the leaked sources could be included in CSSU without jeopardising the whole project. It may even put an end to any future reverse engineering efforts as there are bound to be similarities in the resultant code. It would be very difficult to prove that it didn't come from stolen code.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Not that reverse engineering is particularly legal either ;)

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Depends, its not illegal here

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Reverse engineering is legal (at least in the EU), when the goal is to build a compatible product (e.g. a 3rd-party whatsapp client...)

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Yes, reverse-engineering is legal, except in some backwater countries :)

It has even been tested in court that a software license that prohibits reverse-engineering is not binding in Finland; you cannot be forced to honor such terms if embedded in the licencing agreement.

This comes pretty close to patents issue, I guess @reinob is the expert on the matter but in EU a patent in an innovation covers only the commercial exploitation of the patented feature.

This means that if one makes objects/software/services/whatever and sells them for a fee (I am not sure if it is necessary to make profit doing so?) then one needs to obtain a license from the patent holder; however if one makes and gives away for free, no license is required.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

Thank you for the enlightenment, I stand corrected!

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

I am partly joking but partly serious in this analogy. And there is a real reason I said immoral and not illegal.

Just as with leaking information that is good for common knowledge but dangerous to and suppressed by some parties leads you to a moral dilemma; you need to make sure you are doing it so it leaves your conciense clear.

Just as @pichlo says;

There is a subtle difference between illegal and immoral;
If something is illegal, the rules are forced on you by external parties. When you break those rules it can be considered OK as long as you get away with it. Remember, you did no make the rules!
If, in the other hand you are doing an immoral thing, it goes against your own self and hurts you.

How this relates to the case of leaking maemo sources;
I could not give a toss about it if the sources and rights were owned my MS; that company has treated my friends and colleagues pretty badly and I have no moral obligations whatsover to them.
However as it has been established that the rights are still owned by Nokia it is a different thing alltogether.

Re: Get Microsoft to release the goddamn files
 

If you make something that is patented and make it available in any way in a country where the patent is valid then you need a license from the patent holder, regardless of whether you're giving it away for free, selling it with or without profit, etc.

The only exceptions are (AFAIK):
1) you use something patented in private
2) you teach (e.g. university) something that is patented
3) you are a medical doctor treating a patient. you can do whatever you want without having to worry about infringing.

(maybe there are more, I don't know now).

Plus of course if you are sure/convinced that the patent is invalid, you can try that, but that can take time/money plus the risk of having been wrong (see Oracle vs Google..)

Enough for now..