FreeDOS including Tetris Queen is probably the most flagrant example, showing they'll just take any DOS thing that'll have the code out there (it's just a djgpp allegro tetris clone with Queen MIDIs and photos credited to someone's personal website that'll likely get people DMCA'd if they stream it). It's no Debian dfsg. If I were them, i'd dump Tetris Queen and ask Ken Silverman really really nicely to free his Kentris data and source under the GPL (and probably rename it to Kentet or something else that's not immediately evocative of the Tetris trademark).

RMS on the other hand is a whole other topic. and software freedom/using the GPL license isn't inherently an endorsement of him and his views (and shouldn't be). I'm all for distancing from RMS.

There's no end to the troubles with these so called "free software licenses". I was once reprimanded in the forum for using a FOSS compiler with a "free software license", that did not match the "free software license" chosen by the author of the code I was compiling 🤦 Since then the best "free software license" to me is this one 🤣 In the past I used t0 have some respect to rms, but no... f00ck rms too!

P.S. IMHO SvarDOS > fd (freedos). I'm not involved in both, so this is not a self-promotion.

It is quite difficult for common individuals to have their IP rights defended. For companies it is the way to conduct business and a weapon to wage against their competition.

All these GPL license variants are a viral pest on many fronts: a nightmare to enforce, impossible to certify the source material as original, and hinder a lot of actual FREE software development (Despite their love for presenting themselves as free by the definition of many organizations). I try to avoid them as much as I can.

I'm just wondering if I need to submit 52 pixel art images as a patch or not.

It would be well within my abilities.

I tend to agree with the 'do whatever' license for stuff like that, and would just drop a royalty free set to use instead.

Too much in our world gets ruined by petty squables about such things.

If something is given to someone for free, than how it could be protected by any ("free") license? If someone's giving a thing and expects something else in return, the thing is not free. So, "free, but licensed" (or given under conditions) is a big nonsense. And all these fictional license restrictions are just a big corporate scam. Actually rms gave enough bullsh33ts to "free software community" by promoting some of those non-restrictive, partially restrictive, restrictive... version 1, 2, 3... thousands types of useless "free software licenses".

Here's the thing.

Suppose I make said 52 pixelart images, and I gift them freely.

Then, some chucklefuck changes the colors, files a copyright claim against people using the free ones (including me), and wins in court.

This is *exactly* the kind of thing that prompted these viral licenses.

Its cousin is alive and well with copyright strikes for performances of classical music on youtube, for example. Warner music group is *infamous* for that.

I don't see how some kind of text file with blah-blah-free-license will protect you in court from some chucklef00ck, who got your freely distributed image, changed it and register it as his commercial product accusing you in "piracy" or license/patent violation. Everything in digital form could be easily manipulated and set up (file's metadata, etc.) to look like as if some chucklef00ck is"the real author". Usually normal people do not do such things. But the corporate j3rks like wg the 3rd can feed themselves all the life with such dirty tricks.

Your favorite WTFPL won't be any more protective of such a situation...

Of course it won't protect anyone from anything, but its name is very nice and shows some clear attitude towards all those "free software license" bullsh33t. And that's why I like it 😀

If I was ever to develop and release code for free I would probably not use any license as I don't care. If I was forced to pick one or make one by myself it would be something close to WTFPL. On a side note there are lot of people into vibe coding these days. If you iterate open source code long enough with AI tools you will see that it will remove original author names or even put it's own name as the only author.

I have no public opinion to share with you about RMS. But I have opinion about that kind of letters. I'm against cancel culture. I'm not from US and I lived in a country with USSR soldiers up to 1993. Government were using well known artists and other respected people to sign that sort of anti letters. I don't mind anyone signing a letter of support to help someone but signing a letter of f--- that guy is always pure evil to me. It's a list of shame if you ask me.

Anyway, going back to FreeDOS. ReacOS went into internal code audit once they found out one of their devs was using Windows disasemmbled code. My point is FreeDOS pretends to be pure but as they have Wndows parts inside already they might also have some MS-DOS parts as well as they don't seem to care much.

SvarDOS? FreeDOS? None of them! I'm in FrankenDOS camp.

FrankenDOS?

eM-!3 wrote on Yesterday, 04:38:

I have no public opinion to share with you about RMS. But I have opinion about that kind of letters. I'm against cancel culture. I'm not from US and I lived in a country with USSR soldiers up to 1993. Government were using well known artists and other respected people to sign that sort of anti letters. I don't mind anyone signing a letter of support to help someone but signing a letter of f--- that guy is always pure evil to me. It's a list of shame if you ask me.

If you're somewhat of a "public" figure, and you use your platform to share and defend repulsive opinions, you gotta live with the consequences. This has absolutely nothing to do with cancel culture, this is a case of "you've made your bed now lay in it". You're free to express your opinions, how vile they may be. That's freedom of speech. But that's also everybody else's liberty to consider you're a piece of shit for these opinions and would rather you shut up. Also see Popper's "paradox of tolerance".

Hi, @eM-!3!

eM-!3 wrote on Yesterday, 04:38:

If I was ever to develop and release code for free I would probably not use any license as I don't care. If I was forced to pick one or make one by myself it would be something close to WTFPL. On a side note there are lot of people into vibe coding these days. If you iterate open source code long enough with AI tools you will see that it will remove original author names or even put it's own name as the only author.

Actually the WTFPL "license" is a mockery of rms GNU GPL "free software" nonsense. It is mostly equal to "public domain" ("unlicense"), "CC0" or non-licensed release. I read that g00gel forbids to its slaves being involved in free software projects released under WTFPL "license", which of course is one more plus to the WTFPL "free software license" mockery 😀

eM-!3 wrote on Yesterday, 04:38:

I have no public opinion to share with you about RMS. But I have opinion about that kind of letters. I'm against cancel culture. I'm not from US and I lived in a country with USSR soldiers up to 1993. Government were using well known artists and other respected people to sign that sort of anti letters. I don't mind anyone signing a letter of support to help someone but signing a letter of f--- that guy is always pure evil to me. It's a list of shame if you ask me.

Back in time, when I was young (and slightly naive), I thought, that rms leads a real fight for software freedom... Of course he's not doing this, but plays double role with his fsf. He's just a tickster, who found its niche for parasitism. And that becomes clear for anyone who sooner or later understands how the corporate law/(in)justice works.

This is just my personal opinion about that personality, which self-proclaimed as "free software hero" and someone may agree, while many others can disagree.

eM-!3 wrote on Yesterday, 04:38:

Anyway, going back to FreeDOS. ReacOS went into internal code audit once they found out one of their devs was using Windows disasemmbled code. My point is FreeDOS pretends to be pure but as they have Wndows parts inside already they might also have some MS-DOS parts as well as they don't seem to care much.

I agree. Better off stay away from corporate affairs (by using code, products, etc.), if you're making something (for) free. Unfortunately ReactOS long time ago is not the free alternative to windows f0r many reasons. Probably it is still alternative to something like obsolete win ME.

eM-!3 wrote on Yesterday, 04:38:

SvarDOS? FreeDOS? None of them! I'm in FrankenDOS camp.

FrankenDOS?

To me fd is a total mess and SvarDOS is a way better alternative to it. So far I don't know any better free alternative to m$-DOS in terms of compatibility.

I never heard of FrankenDOS. Thanks, I'll check it.

P.S. Checked out this FrankenDOS and it is exactly what I expected - a "copyright infringement" compilation of different corporate DOS versions 😁 MiNiDOS compilation is less corporate involved as it only uses m$-DOS 6.22 kernel. These types of DOS compilations are "illegal", so not suitable for distribution.

Boohyaka wrote on Yesterday, 05:23:

If you're somewhat of a "public" figure, and you use your platform to share and defend repulsive opinions, you gotta live with the consequences. This has absolutely nothing to do with cancel culture, this is a case of "you've made your bed now lay in it". You're free to express your opinions, how vile they may be. That's freedom of speech. But that's also everybody else's liberty to consider you're a piece of shit for these opinions and would rather you shut up. Also see Popper's "paradox of tolerance".

From my point of view you just used different words to describe what cancel culture is. Once again I'll repeat: I'm not too deep into Linux (yet), I'm not into GPL vs MIT vs BSD, I'm not from USA so I don't follow RMS and I don't plan to spend my time to read what he thinks as I find it irrelevant. I have no opinion on him and have no plans on having opinion about him in the future.

On the other hand I've made a strong opinion about FreeDOS maintainer but still I wouldn't go as far as signing any letter to remove him from his job or from FreeDOS project.

aVd wrote on Yesterday, 06:27:

Actually the WTFPL "license" is a mockery of rms GNU GPL "free software" nonsense. It is mostly equal to "public domain" ("unlicense"), "CC0" or non-licensed release. I read that g00gel forbids to its slaves being involved in free software projects released under WTFPL "license", which of course is one more plus to the WTFPL "free software license" mockery 😀

I get it, that's what I like about it. Same would go for +(forbidden n-word) license which also makes it 100% certain that no corporation will ever use anything with it. But at the same time this one is maybe going one step too far.

aVd wrote on Yesterday, 06:27:

To me fd is a total mess and SvarDOS is a way better alternative to it. So far I don't know any better free alternative to m$-DOS in terms of compatibility.

I never heard of FrankenDOS. Thanks, I'll check it.

P.S. Checked out this FrankenDOS and it is exactly what I expected - a "copyright infringement" compilation of different corporate DOS versions 😁 MiNiDOS compilation is less corporate involved as it only uses m$-DOS 6.22 kernel. These types of DOS compilations are "illegal", so not suitable for distribution.

The most cool side of DOS is that you can use parts from different releases and add some custom software inside and they can still work together. Copyright infringement? It's just a concept that you make on your own and for yourself only. It's not meant to be public and my own FrankenDOS will have different parts from your FrankenDOS if you ever make one. Nothing stops you from legally owning every part of it. We all do. At least on these forums as abandonware is not accepted here.

I use FreeDOS kernel and their command.com. Most other things (ctmouse, jemmex) even if they are in FreeDOS, they are also available outside of it.

Yeah. I got what you mean, when I saw the thread about so called "FrankenDOS" compilations and (re)mixes.

P.S. The software license mockery with the +"n-word license modifier" (it is also forbidden word here and I'm not against the freedom of speech, because to me there are no forbidden words in the real life, but I also accepted the forum's rules, so I have to auto-censor myself here) is something new to me. I like the stupid explanation from the first sight:

By including the word "N..." in a LICENSE file that must be distributed with the software you will ensure: […]
Show full quote

By including the word "N..." in a LICENSE file that must be distributed with the software you will ensure:

The software will not be used or hosted by western corporations that promote censorship
The software will not be used or hosted by compromised individuals that promote censorship
Users of the software will be immune to attacks that would result in censorship of others

🤣

What if someone removes the modifier?
Cancel them on Twitter for using code derived from heresy.

I'm laughing my head off! This is just a brilliant mockery of corporations, all those stupid licenses and the so called "cancel culture" 🤣 I think, I just got new favorite "free software license" 🤣

eM-!3 wrote on Yesterday, 04:38:

I'm against cancel culture.

And yet... here you are, starting a thread about someone violating some random person's copyright that you have nothing to do with.

Well, speaking of DOSes, since I was a relevant contributor to some of MiNiDOS software and documentation, and a big critic of it. About a year ago I came to an understanding with its main "author/creator" and decided to build my own FrankenDOS project, which is almost ready. It contains free software, shareware, but only some of it is open, some components are proprietary but allowed if not sold. So, the limitation is that it cannot be sold commercially but you can personally use it.

IONDOS supports FAT32, LBA and LFN. I made myself from scratch about 23% of its components, 14 % is customized from existing free stuff and the rest is third party proprietary. I am still finishing polishing its documentation. It is working pretty good so far.

.."
IONDOS
------

An ION is small, powerful, and electrically charged.

IONDOS is a live/bootable, HDD installable, 8088 compatible, and excessively
tiny DOS distribution.

Its main goal is to be able to work in the most restricted "PC x86 compatible"
environments utilizing the less possible resources, with the smallest disk and
memory footprint, but still functional enough to compete with any other DOS on
any system."...

Hi, Ignacio!

igully wrote on Yesterday, 20:08:

Well, speaking of DOSes, since I was a relevant contributor to some of MiNiDOS software and documentation, and a big critic of it. About a year ago I came to an understanding with its main "author/creator" and decided to build my own FrankenDOS project, which is almost ready. It contains free software, shareware, but only some of it is open, some components are proprietary but allowed if not sold. So, the limitation is that it cannot be sold commercially but you can personally use it.

IONDOS supports FAT32, LBA and LFN. I made myself from scratch about 23% of its components, 14 % is customized from existing free stuff and the rest is third party proprietary. I am still finishing polishing its documentation. It is working pretty good so far.

I can't find it beyond the new "iron curtain" and I'm curious, if you're also using fd kernel for it?

aVd wrote on Yesterday, 21:03:

Hi, Ignacio!

igully wrote on Yesterday, 20:08:

Well, speaking of DOSes, since I was a relevant contributor to some of MiNiDOS software and documentation, and a big critic of it. About a year ago I came to an understanding with its main "author/creator" and decided to build my own FrankenDOS project, which is almost ready. It contains free software, shareware, but only some of it is open, some components are proprietary but allowed if not sold. So, the limitation is that it cannot be sold commercially but you can personally use it.

IONDOS supports FAT32, LBA and LFN. I made myself from scratch about 23% of its components, 14 % is customized from existing free stuff and the rest is third party proprietary. I am still finishing polishing its documentation. It is working pretty good so far.

I can't find it beyond the new "iron curtain" and I'm curious, if you're also using fd kernel for it?

No, I am using the last build of the Enhanced DR-DOS kernel from this year.
You won't find it because it is not out (yet).

It still needs a bit more documentation to complement it (I am demanding when it comes for documentation). Although the full manual, is ready for a release, the FAQ too and the credits and IP acknowledgement too, I need to tidy up the features document and just pack the bloody thing altogether.