Please help me with suggestions about a GPL violation

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by kwag
That's exactly the "face" of shh, that people never saw, and I'm sad I deleted the complete "FitCD" forum, over at KVCD.Net.
But then again, only some of us remember that, and we know the real (unhelpful) behaviour, in those hundreds of posts.
And THAT, is the issue, and the cause, for all of these happenings.
( I'm still looking for the backup, though! )

-kwag

Kwag Kwag Kwag have you sunk that low? There is no clause in the GPL that states you have to hold everyones hands whenever they ask. There is no subsection that says you have to be everyones friend. People have reasons for the way they behave and should not have to explain it to everyone. There are plenty of developers here who have similar attitudes. They have their reasons and I respect that. They still do good work and that is enough for me. And if ever real problems arise with a project under the GPL there are usually many who rise to the ocasion and pitch in as they can. For instance Milan has not released an official binary for his ffdshow project stable or unstable for basically 2 years! Further only a select few have actually had conversation with him in that time. None the less every week on sourceforge his project almost invarriably has 90% activity! But since his sources are public and anyone with the knowledge can compile them. Several have. Almost like clockwork athos and others keep us regularly supplied with new binaries including new features and fixes. I have a feeling that most of the versions of ffdshow currently installed were not compiled by Milan.

[rds_correia]

@Mr. Neo Neko,
They were not compiled by Mr. Milan.
They are mostly compiled by Mr. Athos that we can find mostly here @ D9.

@Mr. Neuron2 (wherever he is)
Sir, I praise for GPL as much as most of us here and I believe I'm telling the truth when I say we all feel the same @KVCD.
The reason why I'm posting here is because you're not a member there anymore.
In fact you aid us all by developing your D2V branch code.
I'm sure you still remind yourself that a few weeks ago before the MS vs FitCD issue started I came to you, at your own forum, and PMed you about someonelse who calls himself Amnon82 here and Avalon @KVCD.
That person was using your decodefix100 without mentioning your name, without the readme.html and with a new name: yes DVD2AVIDRPEnc.
That was clearly a violation of your rights since Mr. Avalon has not done a single line of code in decodefix100.
And that's why I advised you of such an event happening.
I for sure received a PM from yourself thanking my gesture and good will. As always you're most welcome.
Don't noone come and tell me (not that you did sir) that I don't enforce GPL and developers rights.
In fact, you sir, know that we @KVCD all respect every developer out there using GPL or whatever license.
Though I am here today defending the good name and (moral) rights of one of our members there.
I have been doing so for the last couple of days.
And don't you come, Sir, telling me that by remaining at KVCD as opposed to you I am associated of a criminal.
You should know better than that, sir.
And I would ask you to rephrase sir as it would not be fair for some at KVCD to say the same here at D9, don't you find that true?
I may/may not have the law on my side but WE_all_know that this in plenty of unfair for Muaddib.
We all know, but most here don't care although some say they do.
They just say "the law is the law, period".
Now one thing I assure you all, that is not in the spirit of the GPL license that we should all turn ourselves against each other.
But it seems that as a virus spreading (just kidding of course) it has made some of us act in a very peculiar way.
Regards

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by rds_correia
@Mr. Neo Neko,
They were not compiled by Mr. Milan.
They are mostly compiled by Mr. Athos that we can find mostly here @ D9.

You will also find them at many other places. If I am not mistaken the latest ffdshow binary over at afterdawn is athos's as well. http://www.afterdawn.com/software/video_software/codecs_and_filters/ffdshow.cfm

Originally posted by rds_correia
@Mr. Neuron2 (wherever he is)
Sir, I praise for GPL as much as most of us here and I believe I'm telling the truth when I say we all feel the same @KVCD.
The reason why I'm posting here is because you're not a member there anymore.
In fact you aid us all by developing your D2V branch code.
I'm sure you still remind yourself that a few weeks ago before the MS vs FitCD issue started I came to you, at your own forum, and PMed you about someonelse who calls himself Amnon82 here and Avalon @KVCD.
That person was using your decodefix100 without mentioning your name, without the readme.html and with a new name: yes DVD2AVIDRPEnc.
That was clearly a violation of your rights since Mr. Avalon has not done a single line of code in decodefix100.

Neuron2 at your word we will make ready.

Originally posted by rds_correia
Don't noone come and tell me (not that you did sir) that I don't enforce GPL and developers rights.
In fact, you sir, know that we @KVCD all respect every developer out there using GPL or whatever license.
Though I am here today defending the good name and (moral) rights of one of our members there.

You name has never been sullied. At least not in my oppinion. You have done your best to try and figure out what the right thing is and how to do it. No one can hold that against you. Even if we may not agree.

Originally posted by rds_correia
And don't you come, Sir, telling me that by remaining at KVCD as opposed to you I am associated of a criminal.

Because of Muaddib's actions the situation there I would deem defused. And all Kwag's talk of organization will remain just that. Talk. But keep your eyes open. I should hope he never tries such action again without the express written conscent of his members.

Originally posted by rds_correia
I may/may not have the law on my side but WE_all_know that this in plenty of unfair for Muaddib.

The world is not fair. That is something we all have to live with. But we should try and hold everyone to the same standard. Having ingored this instance how could we make a case for any future such instance and have any respect for what we say? And there will be future instances. Trust me on that.

Originally posted by rds_correia
We all know, but most here don't care although some say they do.
They just say "the law is the law, period".

The law is the law. And most of us strive to change some laws. But that is only when they are unfair or stand to do more harm than good. In what way is the GPL unfair or hurting most people? Tell me that.

Originally posted by rds_correia
Now one thing I assure you all, that is not in the spirit of the GPL license that we should all turn ourselves against each other.
But it seems that as a virus spreading (just kidding of course) it has made some of us act in a very peculiar way.

As someone admittedly not that knowledgable when it comes to the GPL funny you should claim to know the spirit of it. Had that actually been the case likely things may not have progressed to the point they did. I think you are a good person. But I simply can not agree with you on this. ;)

[MfA]

It was never about the law, the law is a means to a cause. Muaddib did not understand it on the level of the law ... but that wasnt an issue.

GPL is a lot of things to a lot of people ... but the main aspects of it are Freedom and reciprocity. Closed source programs dont promote Freedom so the GPL is not there to protect or promote them even if they are free, and reciprocity was ultimately maintained here. Muaddib was not ready to share his source code, so he was denied the use of shared source code.

Some of you wanted for the spirit of the agreement layed down in the GPL to be broken, just because someone misunderstood it ... now that was truely an unfair request to make. The person who made the mistake had remedies open to him, why request of the person who provided the source code in the first place to supply even more than he already did? There is no fairness in that, it is an unreasonable request ... when people act unreasonable there is very little you can do but lay down the law.

[rds_correia]

Hello,
Then I'm affraid Muaddib will make use of the law and obey the license.
But don't expect the community to like it.
And don't forget one thing here: the law is the law and when people don't show reasonable that's what heppens.
You are the witnesses that I tried for every means find us a way here even "fighting" against many's opinions.
Don't just expect that things will be easy anymore.
It is my wish that even after Muaddib takes the proper actions we can all still respect each other.
Regards

[shh]

> about the (my) GPL-spirit

When somebody releases code under the GPL, he wants it to be free and stay free. I could have easyly chosen another license, but I didn't. I've reached my limits and wanted the project to become something big, well, with all of the added up work from other programmers, to become something new.
We all respect free program downloads, but such projects with closed source stop the freedom, because nobody can enhance the project any further. The program is [again] limited to one person.
The point, that everybody can add features to a program, fix bugs, and that all the different abilities of the programmers are added up, is the essential point for people who release under GPL.
Well, that were at least my essential points, why I chose that willing of my code use (= license).
It's clearly visible, that crediting the author, or just a free .exe isn't intended and also cannot compete with this freedom. And that's what people are fighting for: They fight for the freedom, they wanted the code to have and somebody wants to take away.

I remember to have often written „please read the readme, point x“ - and nothing more. What might be harsh, but just saves me time, because it's already written somewhere. I don't want to insult somebody with that. I must ask for a little understanding of my time-saving, since I must use the dictionary quite often, and also must find some time to implement all the feature-requests for you – for free.

I also remember to have wrote something like „the sources are free, please do it on your own. I don't have the time for feature x“. What's wrong with this? Is it too harsh again?
And with „sources are free“ I of course have implied „free under the GPL“. Why should I have meant something else when encouraging people to implement features on their own? It was my wish that the project grows.
Now, as for the freedom of the sources is called, some people's world seem to break apart. Why?

Is this the real face of shh? Yes, it is. :) (not meaning the surreality of kwag's world understanding)
On many FUD and flames I kept calm and tried to answer reasonable and founded. I don't think I can be blamed for anything.

> Removal of MovieStacker

Sad step, but acceptable for me in that way. Though I cannot speak for others who possibly want to see the sources of the released v2.1.0 version.
I hope all this doesn't take away the/your fun on programming.

[Guest]

Originally posted by rds_correia
@Mr. Neuron2 (wherever he is)

[...] And don't you come, Sir, telling me that by remaining at KVCD as opposed to you I am associated of a criminal.
You should know better than that, sir.
And I would ask you to rephrase sir as it would not be fair for some at KVCD to say the same here at D9, don't you find that true? The "crime" is actually one of civil law, so I am happy to rephrase as follows: "criminal" -> "illegal and unethical". Happy now?

I may/may not have the law on my side but WE_all_know that this in plenty of unfair for Muaddib. No, I don't know that and it seems to me muaddib is getting just what he deserves.

[r6d2]

@muaddib,

Excuse me, I forgot to say something very important on my previous post: Welcome to the forum! You know, this is the customary way of greeting newcomers here.
Originally posted by muaddib
That is EXACTLY the kind of feeling that I was missing in this whole issue. That is the spirit and good will I was expecting from developers (and starting to be afraid I would never find). Well, now you’ve come to the right forum. :)

Jokes aside, I’m surprised you never heard of this spirit before (during this riot I mean). You know, when this thing first started at KVCD.net, I did not want to go public because I thought the matter was way out of control. I said to myself: who has both the wits and power to stop this? I naturally thought of Kwag.

I know Kwag, he has always been friendly so I thought I could have a talk with him and share my views, so he might see things differently. However, I failed. I was quite unsuccessful at trying to express my point, since he finally shut down the conversation which what I considered a “Sitting Bull has spoken” tone. :) (Well, the actual phrase was “I already explained things”.)

But as I said, I’m surprised, because one thing that Kwag was interested in hearing from me was the flaws in the AR keeping. In fact, he told me he would let you know about them. Didn’t he? :confused:
I want the sources! I want it because I can. I have the right because of the GPL!No, muaddib, don’t get it wrong. By releasing Moviestacker under GPL you “shouted”: “Sources available on request”. I know this is not what you intended, but that’s the way it was. Don’t let anything blind your sight on that.

Someone said all this was unfair to you. In fact, at least Kwag and rds_correia have expressed opinions on that line of thought. And then Kwag came up with a “solution”: the organization thing. And you bought it, obviously, since it seemed to protect your position and comply with GPL at the same time.

You see? Instead of taking back your move, which was easy: don’t make your program available if the GPL license did not satisfy you, you decided instead to try to get away with it, because you were told by someone you trust that you would comply with GPL!

But think of it this way: if the “organization” theory upholds, anyone could take a GPL source, improve it, wrap it up, get a friend who runs a site (preferably a friend who dislikes GPL), and ask him to host the binary. You could then ask for a registration into the “organization of the multiple users and single developer of this improved program”. Man, you could even charge for it.

Talking about fairness, do you really think this is fair?

Well, not me. And this is what you were told at KVCD. As a result, you were put in a very uncomfortable situation, exposed and criticized for what apparently was a “get away with it” attitude. And, as you have shown on you posts here, that was never you intention!

I tried Kwag to see the implications of what he was doing, but unfortunately, I was not successful. I got the “Sitting Bull has spoken” thing. :)

One last comment on shh’s attitude towards “supporting users”. My experience with shh was completely different to the one you describe. I also contacted him. He wanted to hear about my ideas, he fixed the bugs I reported, and in spite of his difficulty with English, he always responded my requests. Of course he did not build every idea I had, but then again, he was in his own right.

But then again, this is not a popularity contest. You are both welcome in this forum with your ideas and good work.

I reinstate my offer to help you with any resizing and cropping issues, for any future versions. I also have a BR calculator (which I made public of course) which may be of use.

Regards, muaddib, and again welcome to the forum.

[DDogg]

muaddib, this was an unfortunate situation for you, shh, and our whole community. Thanks for working to resolve it with integrity.

I'm sure it has been mentioned, but it will not hurt to say it again. In any future situations, both you and shh may want to consider mutually agreeing to abide by the decisions of an unofficial third party mediator whom you would both agree to trust. That would have been much less stressful on all parties involved. Although I will not directly mention them, I'm sure several names would pop up to both of you that you would both find mutually agreeable.

In the end, I truly hope you know this communities involvement was never really about the merits, or lack of merits, of your individual situation. It was all about upholding the primary fundamental principle of GPL. Sitting quietly and allowing any individual to break this fundamental principle, even if they individually felt they had some special reason to do so, could literally open the floodgates to increasing abuse and the freedoms we enjoy from GPL could quickly disappear.

As was said somewhere, this is a situation where the rights of the many far outweigh the rights of any individual situation. It has just got to be like that, and I hope you can fully embrace the concept and not take any of this too personally.

[rds_correia]

Originally posted by neuron2
The "crime" is actually one of civil law, so I am happy to rephrase as follows: "criminal" -> "illegal and unethical". Happy now?
I beg your pardon, Sir?
What do you mean by illegal and unethical?
I expected you to have a different opinion on us.
But what can I say?
I was wrong about you all the time sir.
And to think that a few weeks ago I tried to help you...
Believe me when I tell you that Muaddib would have done the exact same thing I did.
Maybe we're all naive at KVCD...
I believe this has gone far beyhond my most pessimistic expectations!

No, I don't know that and it seems to me muaddib is getting just what he deserves.

Remember these words above, Sir.
I hope one day you don't see yourself in the same/similar situation.
That is: one in which you need support and just see sarcasm and disrespect towards your work!
I just hope we really don't have to talk with each other ever again!
Good day to you sir.

[rds_correia]

Hello
Given the latest developments between me and another Doom9 team member I'm definitly leaving this forum for good.
My best whishes to those that deserve my consideration, and they know who they are.
I'm PMing the Admin to erase my register here.
Regards

Rui

[Guest]

Originally posted by rds_correia
I hope one day you don't see yourself in the same/similar situation.
No fear! I won't ever violate GPL. I've been a faithful adherent to the GPL philosophy from day 1. I do appreciate your concern on my behalf, however.

[Mug Funky]

I beg your pardon, Sir?
What do you mean by illegal and unethical?
I expected you to have a different opinion on us.


man, how is it one can misinterpret a statement so badly? does rds think neuron called him a criminal?

guh. i'm very forgiving with people who don't natively speak english, but at least some effort must be made to understand what neuron2 said before you jump to the conclusion that he thinks all at KVCD.net are criminals...

i wont even try to explain what he said... there's no point arguing with somebody who actively wants to be insulted, even though none is intended.

if you're going to be in a flamewar (well, i guess you aren't now - you left), you should have a thicker skin than that. (try me out... you can call me what you like and i'll laugh it off)

[marcellus]

I feel sorry to see that everybody managed to hurt everybodys else's feelings. I think this is a bad thing and it must be stopped right away. It does more bad than good and serves nobody's interest.

Since there was so many people with good intentions (myself included) that pointed out to others only bad things I think it might be of some help to concentrate a little only on the good things that maybe escaped from view in the fire of battle (hoping that it's not only wishfull thinking on my side). I took some time and distance, I lost myself many hours and I tried to walk in the "other side"'s shoes.

So (just the good things as I see them myself):
1. Muaddib released a good program. Good for him (and for us too). And expected everybody to be happy.
2. Shh wanted Muaddib to comply with GPL as he should (using shh's GPL-ed code in MovieStacker). Very good, GPL is important.
3. Kwag felt the need to protect Muaddib (like an older brother) from something that appeared to be in his eyes unfair for Muaddib. He went so far that he spoke some ridiculous things that I'm sure he himself doesn't believe (maybe he got so far because as an admin he felt challenged by me as a "disrespectfull" regular member - maybe he had a problem with that). Consequently he took in face so many insults that probably exceed all he heard in his life about him. Well, good thing, kwag is a good friend but too quick to jump to conclusions to be trusted with a good advise. But I'm prepared to believe that his intentions are good and probably it's a good thing (for Muaddib) to have a friend like him.
4. Muaddib felt himself mistreated, misunderstood, unappreciated for his good efforts and betrayed (at least by me as a kvcd member at that time). He felt it's right to appreciate kwag's friendship and protection, opposed to us that are some aggressive unknown people. Maybe kwag helped him before, perhaps even in putting together MovieStacker, so he owes him credit too, not only to shh. Good thing, he is a loyal friend too.
6. Some other members on kvcd took a stand in kwag's and muaddib's back. In their eyes friendship and loyalty seemed to be more important than "some GPL" compliance. They were so brave so they were up to sustain their friend and admin no matter how stupid they looked. Good thing too -to some extent.
7. Me and the rest of "good guys" (on this forum, the "bad guys" on the other) united efforts to defend the spirit of GPL and open source comunity. Well, this is definitely a good thing too.
8. NeoNeko and others took the time and effort to explain in detail the importance of GPL so everybody is more aware well informed than before on the subject. Very good thing.

So, every "side" shown repeteadly very important things and values to the other "side":
1. Friendship is an important thing, no matter what.
2. No real malicious intention was behind muaddib's actions (and neither behind shh's for that matter) and rather the opposite is true.
3. GPL is important, it's not void of meaning in the eyes of the comunity, it unites us (developers and users) and there is always somebody prepared to defend it in public. So it can be trusted and it really is a good foundation to build on.

Now I think it's time for everybody to put aside guns and knives and to come together on the same side, since it's my feeling that are more things that unite us than things that divide us, and all "messages" are begining to be understood.

I hope Muaddib is begining to understand that nobody is after him personally and that if he is prepared to play by the rules is welcome and appreciated (as he finally took the right steps in complying with GPL) - his value as a programmer and his help wasn't been denied. I hope he will understand that GPL is a guarantee for him too as it is for shh, so he can expect the same reaction on our side if he would see his code trapped in somebody else's closed source software (assuming he will release the sources afterall). I fully understand that it was no bad intention on his side (and never thought it was or suggested), he just took pride in making a good program and after that took pride in doing the opposite everybody shouted at him to do (because he felt mistreated by -in his view - ungratefull people). Well, sometime is a good thing to be a rebel, sometimes is not.

I hope that all this sad story will have a happy end afterall. And soon.

best regards
marcellus

EDIT: typo

[Neo Neko]

Well things have settled for now. The original thread is locked for no good reason. And the situation is far from over. I told Kwag he could not get rid of me and he has not. I will be there watching like a hawk. To make sure they stick to their end.

Kwag has proven himself a great manipulator. Using the cocept of friendship and unquestioningly sticking up for your buddies. He has persuaded a number of the community to take leave of their senses and ignore the clear cut nature if the situation. These people simply state that they should support their "friend" at all times. But what they neglect to think of is that supporting your friends is not always about sitting on the side and cheering them on in what ever they do. Sometomes the best support you can give to a frined is to warn them and tell them when they are wrong or in danger. Something none of Muaddib's self proclaimed "friends" took the time to do. It took outsiders to do that. I hope that when the time comes my friends will not cheer me on as I run to throw myself on daggers. But instead shout at me to bring me back to clarity and reality. That should be a lesson for us all, a lesson in what not to do. A FRIEND IS NOT A YES MAN.

What surprises me most is that some of the people there that had made real progress have since fallen back in their old ways. Simply taking Kwag at face value and not taken the time to be a "friend" to him. Some have gotten so comfortable with their old ways that they have even tried to write it off with words like "those people are the minority" or "they just love the GPL more than anything else". Those people "WILL" read this and "WILL" know who they are. And they should know better. I was hard on Kwag but for good reason. It was something none of his "friends" would do for him. And it is something he still needs. Because there are lots of things that he does that still pose a danger to him and everyone else there. A good leader needs to listen as well as lead. Something which Kwag has clearly not taken the time to do. As someone who speaks so much he as so little to say. And when he does speak he has shown himself to be a hatefull person. Hatefull of the GPL and those who use it. Hatefull of those who are different from himself. Kwag showed from post 1 that he had no intention of ever listening.

Frankly as I said it is not the developers job to hold your hand. Even in business environments they have support staff for that. A developers personality or what in your limited interaction with them may percive as a lack of; has no bearing on the legitimacy of the license they choose to use. You can't just disregard their license because you don't like them. Funny that such a concept was the very justification for the behavior over at the other forum. And they claimed they were respecting the developer. When in reality they were disrespecting developers everywhere. It is not for us to understand developers or developers to like us. I suppose that is why places like this have built up such a collection of developers. Because of the respect they show and the way they have their users do so as well.

[NobbyNobbs]

Even if an organisation can use GPL code internally, and not release it publicly, any user who legaly get a copy of the binary have the right to ask for a copy of the source.
At least that is how I understand the GPL

IANAL and all that Bull***t. (check out www.groklaw.net to read more about recent attacs on the GPL.)

[marcellus]

Now I think that perhaps I was misunderstood with my previous post. I'm not sure, my english is not so good. When I tried to shed a "positive" light on kwag and co. was only expecting to get a positive reaction from them, showing them that I try to understand their "out of mind" reactions as much is humanly possible. And by positive reaction I mean a honest admission of guilt and some appologies. Clearly too much wishfull thinking on my side. Their case remainds me of that funny character, iraqi ministry of information.

Anyway, in real life I wouldn't stay alone 3 minutes with people like that, they could steal my wallet and pretend that I'm the one offending them when I cry for help.

sad story, sad people

bye
marcellus

[r6d2]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
The original thread is locked for no good reason.Well, rereading the last posts one can come to the conclusion that since kwag recognized to have made himself stupid posts, he was affraid of the temptation to continue to do so on that thread.

To me that's a good reason.

[Livlander]

Originally posted by marcellus
Their case remainds me of that funny character, iraqi ministry of information.


Sure.
And the case of some others when they stick that much to a strict interpretation of GPL reminds me of Ayatollah Khomeiny.

Having said that, I must admit that the issue to be solved here was not an easy one. But we all know that the war between Iraq and Iran was long...

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by marcellus
Now I think that perhaps I was misunderstood with my previous post. I'm not sure, my english is not so good. When I tried to shed a "positive" light on kwag and co. was only expecting to get a positive reaction from them, showing them that I try to understand their "out of mind" reactions as much is humanly possible. And by positive reaction I mean a honest admission of guilt and some appologies.

No one missunderstood you. But not everyone has had the same experienceas you. Remember that. We are all different and all have valid things to say. You may think good of Kwag. And that carries alot of weight since you have spent time over there. But understand that in my time with Kwag he hardly impressed me. And instead rather offended me. You can be his friend. No one here will dislike you for that. Just understand if some of us don't like him.

Originally posted by marcellus
Anyway, in real life I wouldn't stay alone 3 minutes with people like that, they could steal my wallet and pretend that I'm the one offending them when I cry for help.

There is deep deep irony in that statement for me. I will leave you to decipher that. But you are free yo make your own choices. And I am not one to hold it against you.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by r6d2
Well, rereading the last posts one can come to the conclusion that since kwag recognized to have made himself stupid posts, he was affraid of the temptation to continue to do so on that thread.

To me that's a good reason.

I suppose you are right. But still because of that this may see another thread. Rather than just keeping it to the one. I had no intention of filling that forum with related posts. That is bad nettiquete. But at least one more may be called for then.

[MfA]

Originally posted by Livlander And the case of some others when they stick that much to a strict interpretation of GPL reminds me of Ayatollah Khomeiny.

Oh my god yes, now I realise my mistake ... I shouldnt have thought that putting the GPL on source code would mean people should respect it, I shouldnt expect the small courtesy that anyone who wants to use my source to show me his source in return. That is just so unreasonable, I might as well put on jack boots and salute a picture of Hitler ... that is how evil I am.

Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.

[Nic]

@All mods: Ok, we've been doing a bit of our own comedy recently. But MfA wins the award for funniest post April 2004....surely?

[r6d2]

Originally posted by Nic
But MfA wins the award for funniest post April 2004....surely? I subscribe that too. If only he had used a ;) or :), or if it was posted on april fools day... You know, some guys are not good at appreciating irony and may think he actually meant it!

Anyway, my other contender was precisely this one (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73686) by bb. ;)

[r6d2]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
Just understand if some of us don't like him.Just a line to say I personally don't dislike kwag. In fact I think he is a nice guy, with an interesting dream and which has made interesting contributions too in the encoding area.

And I also think that there is nothing wrong with being wrong at times. Of course the lack of apology thing is a pity indeed, but it takes quite more than being a nice guy to publicly say I'm sorry. It requires a level of self-awareness not easy to accomplish.

[dragongodz]

I personally don't dislike kwag. In fact I think he is a nice guy, with an interesting dream and which has made interesting contributions too in the encoding area.
do you really think so ?

But at least one more may be called for then.
Neo Neko in case you didnt see it kwag has deleted your Neo Neko account and heres the best bit
his information has been recorded now with our legal department.
Next time he shows up, we'll send his complete history with a beautiful letter to his provider, with some of his "higlight" posts.
wow what a really "nice guy" indeed.
And I also think that there is nothing wrong with being wrong at times. Of course the lack of apology thing is a pity indeed, but it takes quite more than being a nice guy to publicly say I'm sorry. It requires a level of self-awareness not easy to accomplish.
it also requires the person to realise they are wrong. kwag in no way admits or thinks that. his comments about coders who choose the GPL are proof enough of that. ok you gave him a way out to maybe not insult coders like Nic, Avery Lee, Neuron2 etc but i in no way believe it. see how he tries to then shift it to companies ?

hey Sun, IBM etc you are not "serious" companies because you have had a hand in GPL programs. so please close your doors now. go join others like Nic, Avery, Neuron2, Sh0dan etc at the losers pub.
thinks-"oh hang on i code GPL aswell, bugger". hey guys hang on.... wait up will you. jeez dont walk so fast. :D

[muaddib]

@ marcellus
I just read that long post you made. At KVCD I told that you should be a lawyer, but with that post you truly look like a diplomat. Those were wise and beautiful words and IMHO, it would end this thread with a golden key (but Neo-Neko and some others look just too personally angry with kwag :( ). Some of your words I agree, some I don’t, but I think that’s exactly how it should be.

@ all
Unfortunately I had no free time in the last 4 days to read/write forums, and I feel that I must express my self again, as some of my intentions seem to be misunderstood. I don’t want to start a flame war again; I never wanted it to begin. So try to read my post this way.

I received some messages (here and at KVDC, PM and not) that I felt like someone coming by my side, giving a cordial slap in my back and saying “Glad that in the end you did the right thing!”.

Sorry, but I have to clarify that… I didn’t ask to kwag remove MovieStacker from download because I thought that was the right thing (thinking in a wider meaning of “right” than just “legally right”). I did it because GPL forces me to do so. You didn’t change my mind about it. Not even a bit.

I also didn’t change my mind about what is “legally right”. And that seems to me that I was never understood for you. What is really understandable, because I’m certainly not as eloquent and expressive as many of you here. I tried to say it before (in KVCD and in my other post here), and I’ll try again... please try to understand that is really difficult for me to fully express my self in english.

First, I don’t want this to be understood as an excuse! I’m sick to hear that ignorance is no excuse. I never wanted it to be!
Well, here I go again… I never wanted to break the rules of GPL, even if I don’t agree with them! I didn’t know that I was doing that not releasing the full sources. When I released the incomplete sources of MovieStacker 1.1, shh accepted that, or at least didn’t say the opposite. Maybe because he also had not fully read the license or maybe something else. I don’t know. The fact is that I keep coding thinking that that was good enough. When shh decided to demand the full sources now (I was still not knowing), he did not came to me, but to the forum. If he had come to me, just two things could have resulted. The first one is our personal problem could have been cleaned and I could have given the sources. The second is that, we were not able to wash our differences and I would not want to give my sources. Of course I would have tried to show him my point of view, the same way I did at KVCD, but if he did not accept it and still wanted the sources because the GPL says he can, then I would have removed the download as happened later (but without all this riot).


dragongodz> you chose the public way aswell when you chose to respond and agree with the ideas of kwag.When I read shh post at KVCD there were already 20 posts of flame war! I couldn’t have just sent a PM and not respond public anymore. The feelings (including mine) were already inflamed.


dragongodz> since you NEVER released the full source nobody could have made and tested changes even if they wanted to.I guess you are right, but I never asked too. I was just trying to say that I believe the attitude of wanting the source “just because I can”, is not the right one.


Neo Neko> It is not the developers job to be everyone's buddy.Of course not! But they also do not have to show their asses to every one who ask for help. Beside that, IMHO, as a developer you do have some responsibility with the ones who uses your program. (almost like you have with the ones you captivate)


Neo Neko> I'm sorry you feel that way when it was you who first blemeshed the spirit. And then compounded it in listening to Kwag.Sorry, but I didn’t blemish its spirit. I not even knew its spirit. Now I know. And I believe that the kind of attitude you showed was never intended by GPL.
And yes, kwag is a good friend of mine.


Neo Neko> Honestly you misunderstand my intention and oppinions.Well, to be honest I have to say that I really have misread you. (my bad english again :( )
I re-read some of your posts, and found that you are not as “bad” as I was thinking.
But that don’t change my mind about you not been correct saying “I want because I can. After, I will delete it”. I know that is your right. But just that don’t make it “right”. You don’t change your religion just because you can, though it is your right.


Neo Neko> I do not hate you.Me neither. Sincerely.


Neo Neko> Simply what you have doneMe either.


Neo Neko> You have done your best to try and figure out what the right thing is and how to do it. No one can hold that against you. Even if we may not agree.:goodpost: Those words were directed to rds_correia. And I totally agree with you.


shh> I remember to have often written „please read the readme, point x“ - and nothing more.
shh> I also remember to have wrote something like „the sources are free, please do it on your own. I don't have the time for feature x“.Well, that was not like this. And certainly there were more.
And about your “spirit” of GLP, I’m not sure if I can believe that or not. But I have to tell you that if you had told me what you write in your last post. I would probably had release the sources, and we would not have all this crap going on (forum disrespecting forum, people disrespecting people, and fights for what license is better then other). That was a noble wish, but you never showed it to me. May be because the situation never let you do that, I don’t know. But you choose this way (and even other want me to share this blame, I don’t), and make it public without not trying to ask or show your point to me. In fact what you did and the point you showed (with backup here) was very far from that. Unfortunately, before every thing that happened, I can’t release the sources (now). But the GPL was enforced with the argument that “the law is the law”. And as I said before, that is fine to me. Even I if I don’t agree with it. But I’ll keep it this way... “GPL B&W”.


shh> Sad step, but acceptable for me in that way. Though I cannot speak for others who possibly want to see the sources of the released v2.1.0 version.Wow... You made me think that I’ll never rest until I release the sources!
Is that you intent? Nah... I’m sure not. But wow... now I’m worried... even scared!


neuron2> No, I don't know that and it seems to me muaddib is getting just what he deserves.Hehe… That not surprises me. Don’t get me wrong I think you do a great job with your filters, and I respect you for that.
I have read some of your posts, and I think I know a small bit of your temper and personality. And I couldn’t expect anything more than that from you. But that’s ok, I really don’t care.
“Seeker after truth” you say... you (we all) have a long way; you’ll not find it just looking under your shoes.


r6d2> Excuse me, I forgot to say something very important on my previous post: Welcome to the forum!Well, that is very nice. And you look like to be a nice guy.
But that (the welcome) doesn’t seem to be the majority feeling. And honestly I don’t feel comfortable here in this forum. I don’t know, but I probably never will.


DDogg> Sitting quietly and allowing any individual to break this fundamental principle, even if they individually felt they had some special reason to do so, could literally open the floodgates to increasing abuse and the freedoms we enjoy from GPL could quickly disappear.I don’t believe that I break anything. Well, at least I was not aware with that. Again, this is not an excuse, I already said that. And I wrote what I wrote because I just have to. I would do that if shh had PM me, or in public (the way it was). That is my point of view and my feeling about the matter. I could not (in PM ou Public) say yes or no without giving my reasons. If they are valid or not; or if shh would embrace these reasons is a totally different question that would depend just on him. I just had to try. Even if I wasn’t waiting he would accept it.


Regards,
muaddib

[Livlander]

Originally posted by MfA
Oh my god yes, now I realise my mistake ... I shouldnt have thought that putting the GPL on source code would mean people should respect it, I shouldnt expect the small courtesy that anyone who wants to use my source to show me his source in return. That is just so unreasonable, I might as well put on jack boots and salute a picture of Hitler ... that is how evil I am.

Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.

You are welcome. I am pleased you now understand the reason why laywers can work and earn money, even if hundreds of laws have been writen.
By the way, I don't know what jack boots are, but reading your words, I can imagine, and they sure fit you well...

[shh]

muaddib> Well, that was not like this. And certainly there were more.

Well, certainly you have a different view about this.

muaddib> But I have to tell you that if you had told me what you write in your last post. I would probably had release the sources, and we would not have all this crap going on

Perhaps. But there is no possibility to step back.
Personally I like to talk public, because the GPL is also in public interest. And as I've released my sources to the public it is arguable, if all this is or was just a matter between us two.
I also like it that someone points out my errors. And of course I also like it, to get founded answers from people who know the GPL better that me.
Sadly (not to my intention) a "discussion" never built up at kwag's. I was the bad guy and the folks over there didn't even try to understand my point of view. What followed was expectable - for me and for you.

[kwag]

Originally posted by shh
I was the bad guy and the folks over there didn't even try to understand my point of view.
@shh,

I think I understand your point of view very clearly, and it's well explained (understood, analyzed and digested) by industry experts (links) here:
http://kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10606

-kwag

[avih]

muaddib, you ARE welcome.

ppl make mistrakes, it happens. acknowledging them is the hard part. or as a corrolary, to err is human, to forgive is devine.

so i hope both of you will forgive eachother for the errors that might have taken place. i'm glad to see you're talking sensly to one another.

as a side note, and without trying to put any pressure on u, imho, you might gain much from actually openning your sources. many ppl will help you, fix bugs, etc. it's so beautifull when a group of people work on the same source, and anyone in the world can improve and contribute.

xvid, linux, and so many other major software these days are GPL. just look at them. without them beeing open source they definately wouldn't be where they are now.

if it's GPL/BSD/LGPL/etc is a personal preference. but the open source as a concept is such a beautifull one.

peace.
avi

[dragongodz]

kwag - thank you. thats some funny stuff. i mean come on look at where he heads with it. he goes on several times about sections of the open source community critisizing the commercial software world(such as microsoft).

GNU literature is far from neutral. Much of that literature is in effect a pamphlet demanding "freedom" for software developers. The GNU license itself reads not like a license but like a manifesto against the evils of proprietary software.
maybe if he opened the other eye he would be able to read because thats the biggest load of rubbish and shows exactly where this guys coming from.

hearing the epitomes of capitalism --Microsoft and the like--accused of sovietism by a group that advocates collective property of all software seems bit far-fetched.
huh ? advocates collective property of all software ? whats this guy been drinking ?

It would all the same be a mistake to portray that group as slightly eccentric do-gooders. Their propaganda is a campaign of hatred against people whose only "crime" is to want to make a living out of the wares they produce
can you see how much bull this "article" is yet ?

That perception is that commercial software is evil. In fact, one of the catchy GNU links is entitled "Is Microsoft really the great Satan?". The page to which it leads (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/microsoft.html) gives the answer. In short, yes indeed, but don't just pick on Microsoft; anyone else who "denies users their rightful freedom" (i.e. sells software) is just as satanic.
hmm lets try the whole line instead of that abbreviated one shall we.
"We see that Microsoft is doing something that is bad for software users: making software proprietary and thus denying users their rightful freedom."
ahh so it isnt about selling software but making it propriety, and if you follow the link they say
"Proprietary software is software that is not free or semi-free. Its use, redistribution or modification is prohibited, or requires you to ask for permission, or is restricted so much that you effectively can't do it freely."
hmm didnt microsoft get sued successfully for trying to make their own version of java(which other would have had to pay for) prohibiting competition etc(besides the fact they didnt even invent/own java). just one example of microsofts attempts to limit what a person can and cant run/use and/or how on the operating system you have bought.

and it just goes on and on and on in a similar fasion.

so kwag if thats your "evidence" that the GPL is evil and should be screwed over and "experts" agree then i understand(and digest) your attitude all to well. theres an old saying very prevelent to computers, rubbish in = rubbish out. :D

[kwag]

Originally posted by dragongodz

can you see how much bull this "article" is yet ?

What I can see, is that you are very narrow minded.
You are obviously completely biased in one direction, and nobody can make you think different.
You should read (instead of skim) the articles, which will obviously take more time to analyze and to make a more intelligent conclusion, than the time it took you to reply since I posted the message.
You obviously didn't read everything, unless you are a 1000WPM reader :D

Too sad :rolleyes:

-kwag

[dragongodz]

kwag - did i read all the links ? no. if you bother to read you will see i quote from that one you actually posted in the link here. so your perception of my reading is as flawed(and wrong) as many other statements you have made.

as for narrow minded, well thats the pot calling the kettle black isnt it. the amount of squirming and changing your story you have done shows exactly how even when presented with facts you dont accept them.

too sad ? why yes you are. :devil:

[kwag]

@dragongodz,

Everyone is free to make a decision and choose whatever license they want.
To me, it's very obvious the licenses I choose to work and develop with.
The links were presented to broaden the perspective, with facts and real industry opinions.
I hope it helps many people who don't have a clue about what GPL is, and now, they can really understand it, and make their own comparisons with other licenses.
Which, BTW, the number of licenses is growing at a ridiculous rate!:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ (License Index, on left side)

-kwag

[MfA]

Note that the article in question never tried to attack the legitamacy of the GPL, it attacked the legitamacy of arguements against proprietary software by GNU.

"The people who wrote the GPL are full of it so I am fully entitled to just break the license." is a rationalization of immoral behaviour, and one not endorsed by the the article in any way shape or form.

Rationalization remains rationalization, you know damn well what a person intends when he releases his source code under the GPL ... he places trust in you to abide with those intentions. Im glad muaddib decided to live up to that trust.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by kwag
@shh,

I think I understand your point of view very clearly, and it's well explained (understood, analyzed and digested) by industry experts (links) here:
http://kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10606

-kwag

Perhaps I should post this over at KVCD.net for you. [Yes I already have another account and you approved it. ;) ] But I will start with it here. From what I have read so far the paper is "semi" well written. There are quite a few simple gramatical issues which detract from it. Something that a simple proofreading would catch. Right at the first part of the first doccument I already see a problem. They list two types of GPL supporters. Software Anarchist and Software Libertarians. They leave out at least the third group of which I and many others belong to. Granted it does not have a catchy name. And it does not project the anti-GPL bias you like to perpetuate. Simply put we are opensource supporters who support all opensource Including BSD, GPL, and other licenses like those on Apache and Xfree. Yet do not believe that no one should own software. Or that all software should be free. Simply put opensource and the GPL especially present a force that stands against those like Microsoft and provide balance. And competition against such software that those like Microsoft can not destroy. At this point the papers author has shown some real ignorance or lack of insight. Because software anarchist or libertarian the GPL clearly does not work toward either goal. First of all the software may be "free" but someone still owns it. Sorry software anarchists. Secoend even though the software is "free" at the moment that does not stop the author from changing the license and charging for future versions. Sorry software libertarians. The GPL is not for you.

I stopped reading the links you posted and took a look at the rest of the site far a moment. I must say that it is one of the most hypocritical anti-linux advocasy sites I have ever seen. I say anti-linux even though the site never says so itself. [that I have read yet] Because it I extremely obvious. Funny the guy writing there does not seem to have the time or knowledge to write on any of the flaws inherant in the BSD licensing and the cult that follows it like yourself. Which is odd since the BSD in and of itself is rife with flaws. His article on simplicity in OSS was extremely entertaning and full of incorrect thinking. Simplicity begets complexity. It does not matter how simple you code a software. If you put any number of simple software or code together in a project like lets say KDE. All those "simple" parts will still build a highly complex system. Further it would be more complex to maintain in large part than if you just disregarded the components simlpicity from the get go and coded for a single homogenius product.

BTW Kwag since you obviously hold this guy in high regard [LOL] where exactly did Dr. Nikolai recieve his doctorate? What was his doctorate on and what was the major focus of his studdies? Any site I have found on the internet that has anything to say about the man [admittedly very little] only links back to his web site. And of course his website has yet to yield any credential information to back up his statements or claims. It is a much more wordy site than the previous BSD developer dren you linked to. But it is important to note that it is still dren. :p

[kwag]

Originally posted by MfA
you know damn well what a person intends when he releases his source code under the GPL ...
Really?
You think so?
I'm positive that at least 90% of the people that release programs as GPL, don't even understand half of what the license says.
They just do it, because "everyone else" who releases GPL software does it.
I'm sure these articles I pointed out will make many people think twice, before they commit their software to GPL bindings.
And this kind of thread and discussion, is exactly what opens up some eyes ;)

-kwag

[Nic]

Keep it friendly guys or the thread will be closed.

Those were interesting links...

There are different licenses for different things. But I think license talk is pretty irrelevent to this thread. As we are only dealing with the GPL.

As for my own personal opinion on BSD and GPL...maybe ill sign up to kvcd.net for that. But for here, lets focus on shh and muaddib's case. Which sounds like it's becoming amicably resolved....which is good :)

-Nic

ps
apparently the doctor does make a habbit of criticising OSS: http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/10/12/linux_guru_raymond_accused/
(raymond's reply to: Nikolai http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_11/raymond/ )
Search for him with google....What's he ever done for OSS that makes him so right? But that's for another thread...

[Neo Neko]

Indeed Nic I agree with your assesment. I made a comment on it. But that is the extent of what I am gonna say here. Leave it to Kwag to try to distract people from the issue than try to face the issue itself. Typical.

[MfA]

Sorry for the personal attack, it was stupid of me ... I have continued the discussion about the GPL here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75429) and I will try to remain civil (although I cannot promise to not resort to sarcasm again if compared to a dictator :).

[Guest]

@muaddib

Just for the record, can you please state your reasons for not wanting to distribute your source code, both prior to this brouhaha, and as of today. Thank you.

[Doom9]

Most of you were probably not even doing this when I was first accused of violating the GPL with my site for the first time. It triggered, just as with any subsequent GPL violation I have witnessed, a defensive reaction. I was thinking "what the heck is this guy's problem, he's not even the license holder".

But, then I took a step back, and actually bothered to read the GPL (the guy was nice enough to provide me with a few useful links, starting with the license, and some GPL FAQs) and I realized, that while I could distribute GPL programs without the source, I had to provide the latter upon request. Thus, it would be a smart move on my part to make sure I have the source code available in the first place. It took me weeks getting all the sources I needed (some developers never bothered to release any sources from their GPL derived works), and in some cases implicit threats as to what I'd have to do without the sources (remove the programs from my site). During that time, I was also talking to developers of the programs in question, and they were more than willing to come to an amicable resolution (if you look hard enough you'll notice that not every binary distribution matches the source distribution, but where it doesn't I have been able to come to an agreement with the license holder). In the end I was able to rectify the situation, and subsequently I think my software archive also became an interesting source for developers. Other sites soon followed the example and started carrying sources as well.

Unfortunately, most of the time somebody is caught red handed, the situation doesn't get out of the defensive stage. Instead of taking a step back to look at the bigger picture, relax and then do the right thing (note that even in the court case in Germany and previous issues surrounding the same code, nobody was ever sued for money... you can bet your behind that if it were a commercial license holder, money would've been all they are about) and this makes me kinda sad. It's okay to feel defensive, it is human nature, but why is it so darned hard to get over the initial anger? Nobody will hate you or flame you to all eternity if you stand up, admit you were wrong and try to rectify the situation. People tend to forgive those who admit their mistakes.. those who stubbornly go on claiming they were right, they'll get to hear a different tune.

[M7S]

Hi. My first post. I just want to write a little analogy.

Imagine if the person who invented Lego would have decided to publish Lego under something similar GPL instead of making money of it. At his doorstep he would have left some boxes of Lego and written a note which said: "Feel free to take this boxes of Lego and build whatever you like. The only thing I want in return from you is that you give an description of how you built the things you built." This scenario is very unrealistic but that doesn't matter for this analogy.

Now imagine that someone did pick up one of the boxes but did only read the first sentence on the note. This person made a great castle with the pieces of Lego and continued by painting the castle and building it further with other materials. In the end you couldn't recognise much of the pieces from the Lego box.

The castle builder now decides to publish his work but didn’t include any instructions on how he built it. He really didn’t know he had to in the first place. Right? The Lego inventor still felt as if someone had stolen his work, because hi had made clear rules on what you had to do to be allowed to use his Lego boxes.

What can we learn from this story, except from the fact that Lego is very nice to build things with ;) ? Well its two in the morning here so I won’t try to make any conclusions. Decide for yourselves whether the Lego inventor or the Castle builder is wrong in this matter. If you think that the castle builder should have to release a description of how he built his castle, do you think that muaddib should have to release his source, too? If not is my analogy flawed?

I’m sorry if my English is bad. I’m not used to write lengthy pieces of texts like this one, in a foreign language, late at night. I’m hoping this analogy would help someone to see things in a slightly other perspective. Please concider, this is my fisrt post. I sympathise with both ssh and muaddib even if I have a clear view on which one that is right in this question.

Good luck resolving this.
M7S

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by M7S
If you think that the castle builder should have to release a description of how he built his castle, do you think that muaddib should have to release his source, too? If not is my analogy flawed?

Basically yes and yes. But I would however cloud the situation a bit. If the castle builder could get the lego inventors aproval and consent not to release instructions that would also be fine. But that part is up to the inventor.

It's all about the terms of usage. In both cases they were clearly posted. Had the inventor not had terms of usage clearly posted then the builder would have at least had a very weak argument. But that was not the case. No one hates the builder. But they would be understandably upset with the caviler attitude the builder had. Which in and of itself is not bad so long as there is the capacity to change.

[Kika]

Wow, what a mess. Before i found this thread, i gueesed, i'm part of a big community, and now?
I don't see where the problem is. We are talking about Freeware, right? So why is it that complicated for programmers, to share their Source-Codes? We do exchange our experiences in Encoding every Day we are online - what's the problem in doing the same with Source-Codes of free - FREE! - Software?

@kwag and Muaddib
The last time, i heard such Arguments was in Kindergarten. It does not matter if you like the GPL or not. The rules do exist, and if part of GPL-Sourcecode is used, the rules have to be accepted. If not, remove the GPL-Code from your Programs or stop distributing your programs - do as you wish, but do it! And if you accept the rules, share the Source-Codes. I don't see a real probem here.

Privat comment: Das ist die blödsinnigste Diskussion, die ich je gesehen habe... (in german because i don't know how to translate "blödsinnig" into english).

[stax76]

So why is it that complicated for programmers, to share their Source-Codes? We do exchange our experiences in Encoding every Day we are online - what's the problem in doing the same with Source-Codes of free - FREE! - Software?


For instance to prevent competitors to benefit from the source. At one point actually I regretted opening my source for that reason but now I would always use a open source license for freeware.

[dragongodz]

M7S - the builder is clearly in the wrong because he did not make the effort to check conditions of use. they were readily available in the form of an included note.
now the part you missed out is what would have been the likly action taken next by the inventor. you will find in (at least)99% of cases the inventor would have informed the builder of his mistake and asked him to rectify it. is this unreasonable ?
threats of legal action would be an extreme last resort, only caused by the flat refusal of the builder to rectify the situation, which again in (at least) 99% of times it would never get to.

For instance to prevent competitors to benefit from the source. At one point actually I regretted opening my source for that reason but now I would always use a open source license for freeware.
yep and the GPL in no way stops you from closing your source later if you wish. the only condition is you do not include someone elses GPL code because then its you that would be benefiting from someone elses source without returning the favour. its hard to understand why people cant see that isnt it.

[M7S]

now the part you missed out is what would have been the likly action taken next by the inventor.

My intensions was not to include any actions of the inventor nor of the builder. I just wrote about how the inventor would feel, not what he would do. I agree with you and Neo Neko on how the problem would have to be resolved. Still I think its important to point out that the inventor feels like he's been robed.

In the end its about using a source without being willing to pay the price for it. The price is to publish your source. If that price is to high, don't use the source or perhaps ask the owner of the source if he is willing to change the price.

[jorel]

Originally posted by M7S
My intensions was not to include any actions of the inventor nor of the builder. I just wrote about how the inventor would feel, not what he would do. I agree with you and Neo Neko on how the problem would have to be resolved. Still I think its important to point out that the inventor feels like he's been robed.


great post here M7S, very wise....seems a great person with wide vision! ;) the point is that Shh "feels" that was robed but he don't was.
my personal "welcome in forum" M7S !