I dont think that I should applaud to this message. Among other reasons the most important is this. This forum isnt science with its strict rules about proof and refutation and neither a court of justice because then the Rybka question could have been answered years ago - in favor of Vas against unproven allegations by the so called mousquetiers. But in real we have here a place for all sorts of insinuations, insults and character defamations. And in such games time is important. Weeks or months later, when the war is over, even the absolute truth couldnt delete the evil that had been created over the years.Ryan Benitez wrote:The line is not clear to most people because ideas are free, code is not. RMS may say that the GPL is the only way for a program to be free but even that is not true in the sense that it is only free within the GPL. With Fruit being GPL the important thing is the code, not the ideas from any legal stand point. Yes you can prove that ideas from Fruit are used in Rybka, and from a moral stand point maybe Vas understates the use. This does not yet prove that GPL code was taken outside the the GPL. The PSTs are an interesting subject on this because they are easy to find in the code of both programs by anyone. The issue is that PST values and data shape as far as I know are not covered by the GPL. If people take moral exception to some of what was in Rybka 1 that is an understandable subject to debate that I prefer stay away from but GPL violations are a serious charge that I hope are not dangling here any longer as this would be a poor place for such an issue. The FSF takes reports serious and if a program is cleared by the FSF the program should not be questioned on its GPL status any longer.
Flame wars (without any truth) create a climate for illegal activities which were brandmarked by the crowd if the hystery against a program and its author hadnt been created. In other words if a famous figure declares that someone is immoral in his practice the immoral as such becomes tolerable as a revenge - not in truth but in the distorted minds of the people.
In reality we have institutions like the police or the attorney general who are allowed to fight crime also with methods that are itself illegal. But private persons without any authorization have no right to analyse and then even to publicise something out of the private sphere of other people. Not to mention the criminal hype if illegal activities are covered by anonymous authorship.