What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
You and You and You. view!
youtube.com - You don't need to get a phone. You need a phone that gets you.
63 Comments
- gigzter, on 11/11/2009, -1/+60Apparently nobody told cnet....get it before it's gone :)
http://download.cnet.com/Windows-7-USB-DVD-Downloa ... - kaykfrink, on 11/11/2009, -0/+44Why doesn't Microsoft just release the tool and the code? It is just a distribution tool, and its not the end of the world if Microsoft starts using a couple of minor GPL products here and there.
- flyinfoofighter, on 11/11/2009, -1/+33Is the sky blue?
- kevinmoore, on 11/11/2009, -3/+31I wonder if they use any other GPL'd code anywhere else?
- 4321234, on 11/11/2009, -2/+28I also pulled my tool. Should I consult an attorney?
- DulcetTone, on 11/11/2009, -3/+29Sometimes, quality creeps in despite your most vigilant efforts.
- doctordbx, on 11/11/2009, -0/+24Article criticises Microsoft for yanking the file as soon as it could and "jumping to conclusions". Obviously the author has never been involved in a damages claim before. Yank first, assess situation, then if nothing is wrong, put it back up.
It's a lesser scale problem but still equivalent to pulling a potentially harmful product off the shelf until the product is either given the all clear or deleted/destroyed. In this case, the harm is against themselves not the end user. - krystalo, on 11/10/2009, -1/+22Oh boy, ***** ahead. Good thing they pulled it before making any further decisions I guess.
- Wander2000, on 11/11/2009, -0/+15And they thought WGA would get rid of that pirating issue.
- badtzmartin, on 11/11/2009, -0/+15Depends how hard. Maybe call a doctor.
- 3242130193, on 11/11/2009, -0/+14IANAL but I think they would be forced to abide by GPL rules ie. open the source (if someone wanted to see it) and forfeit any patents on it. They have pulled the tool but since it's already in the wild, they might have to do it nevertheless.
- TMFinept, on 11/11/2009, -0/+12Some lazy developer is going to get fired!
- TheBlargh, on 11/11/2009, -0/+12well depends of the light wave.
- andrewtheart, on 11/11/2009, -1/+12You prefer Ubuntu because the makers of closed-source operating systems sometimes mistakenly (or deliberately -- we don't know which yet) "violate" the GPL, get caught, and remove the tool from existence? Shoddy reasoning there, at best, especially since we have no idea what really happened yet. I for one like Ubuntu simply because it's fast, free, and extensible.
I'd go with ArsTech's conclusion --
"...Bradley Kuhn, the technical director of the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC), has published a helpful set of guidelines about the most productive way to respond to a suspected violation of the GPL. The guidelines caution against jumping to conclusions, since GPL violations are extremely common (Kuhn finds one a day) and encourage free software enthusiasts to give violators the benefit of the doubt, so that's what we're going to do for Microsoft." - JohnnySoftware, on 11/11/2009, -0/+10If that is all that it does then why did MS use it?
- TheWindBlows, on 11/11/2009, -0/+10They keep getting caught left and right with it. The hypervisor drivers were originally a violation of GPL is why they released them, since the option to not have them just wasn't acceptable.
- alex7575, on 11/11/2009, -1/+10Serious question.
If MS does violate a GPL, or any free open source license, what can they be sued for? (as in punitive damages, and restitution) - akiratheoni, on 11/11/2009, -1/+10They can be sued for copyright infringement as well as request for an injunction against the company, and request that "damages and litigation costs be awarded to the plaintiffs".
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/jun/10/bu ... - replaysMike, on 11/11/2009, -2/+8a webpage that no longer links to correct content on Microsoft.com? I must say I've never seen that before.
- SeaICIubber, on 11/11/2009, -0/+6Yes he does
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/ima ... - cyssero, on 11/11/2009, -1/+6I grabbed it before they took it down, thought this might happen. It's pretty basic but allows you to format a USB drive and make it bootable. There's plenty of similar tools but this is easy and works well.
Windows7-USB-DVD-tool.exe - http://www.mediafire.com/?zxmlqbqzojt (MD5 D5813F05661542E546133250172785DF - verified here http://www.virustotal.com/analisis/25108cd50bbf058 ... ). - alpharaptor, on 11/11/2009, -0/+4does the pope ***** in the woods?
- Eric-tile, on 11/11/2009, -0/+4When you run the tool in XP it tells you that you need to install the Image Master API v2 (KB932716-v2) update. Obviously it's going to be referencing ImageMaster method and function names.
If all they're doing is utilizing an API, then is there really an issue? - tacojohn48, on 11/11/2009, -0/+4I believe it is called humor. You should look into it. Also look into the reply button.
- paulsmith288, on 11/11/2009, -1/+5open source evangalist are not wetting themselves over what MS has done with a little bit of code - but the power of the GPL.
Making big companies conform to it GPL is whats exciting - knowing that they cant ignore it - even if they have a big enough legal team. - trogdoor, on 11/11/2009, -1/+5All they are required to do is stop distributing it, which they have done.
- robertisaar, on 11/11/2009, -0/+4only if you were in public and confronted by a police officer.
- andrewtheart, on 11/11/2009, -0/+3Mirror: http://www.zshare.net/download/68297842acd698e0/
- andrewtheart, on 11/11/2009, -0/+3Also, what I wanted to say is that there are a ton of programmers/teams at Microsoft and any team (or individual) could have slipped this code by their managers pretty easily, I'd imagine. MS just has to go through the official process w/ upper management to figure out of this is really a violation / slipup. Unfortunately when the little guys slip stuff by the big guys and someone finds out, it makes Microsoft as a whole look foolish.
- andrewtheart, on 11/11/2009, -0/+3According to the article, Microsoft claims that they pulled the tool from their website because they are investigating / reviewing the matter. Presumably, they want it gone in the off-chance they did really violate the GPL. So I interpreted it not as an admission of guilt, but Microsoft proceeding just proceeding with extreme caution.
- hyperspaztik, on 11/11/2009, -1/+4Anyone have this download at all? I kind of want it =]
- EnergyEinstein, on 11/11/2009, -1/+3"Oops"
- twiztidsinz, on 11/11/2009, -0/+2From what I understand.. it's just a tool to download Windows 7.
You can probably find the 'USB version' on any torrent site... just be sure to verify the hashes to make sure you don't get anything extra. - mithrasinvictus, on 11/11/2009, -0/+2http://imagemaster.codeplex.com/
- andrewtheart, on 11/11/2009, -0/+2I mean think about it -- how many managers are actually trained to spot GPL violations in the code their employees submit to them? Most code looks the same... it's all plain, boring text. The only way this would be unacceptable is if Microsoft had some mechanism to scour the Internet for source code and detect possible blatant "plagarism", but they just ignored the red flag because they were rushing to release Windows 7 (or something else equally inexcusable). In that case, shame on them. If they don't have such a system they might consider investing in that...?
- Phate8263, on 11/11/2009, -0/+2You had me until you said Java sucks...
- datdamonfoo, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1It's the end of the world!
- 3242130193, on 11/11/2009, -1/+2Yeah, but by pulling the tool, isn't MS essentially admitting that they did it? They know how they made the software and besides, this is the first version of Windows ever to use USB installation AFAIK so why would they reinvent the wheel? Just use something already available.
Agree that this has nothing to do with Ubuntu - fuzzynyanko, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1Yes and no. Microsoft does a few projects that way to an extent.
- Lighteye, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1LOL...CNET still has it up...grab it if you need it. http://download.cnet.com/Windows-7-USB-DVD-Downloa ...
- smrekar, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1done and done.
- Nitrodist88, on 11/15/2009, -0/+1Because if they use resources developing this, then it also means that they pretty much can't use it in conjunction with other products since it would be a derivative work and that derivative work would be subject to the GPL.
See Copyleft and Viral licensing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft#Viral_licens ... - gilbes, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1Probably because they didn't make their own wrapper for the API yet in .Net, because they don't have their own wrapper for the API in .Net.
- depro9, on 11/11/2009, -2/+3HAHA!
- hyperspaztik, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1Worked like a champ! Thanks.
- MWeather, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1That sounds like an important part.
- luciferactual, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1Sweet!
- Forklore, on 11/11/2009, -0/+1What do you expect...MS is not used to Open Source. Remember you have to pay for everything they have and they damn sure aren't going to tell you how it works.
-
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 