Programming Question How can I get the source code.

[Quick_Nick]

There's no shortage of people selling Orbiter unfortunately. There's almost no point in posting about them individually. I think by now and from older threads, Martin knows that Orbiter shows up daily on eBay for example. (Or used to anyways)

 

[Face]

If installer is bundled with ad-ware, every download of Orbiter involves a transfer of money from the company ordering the ad-space to the company providing the ad-space. It doesn't even matter if softonic makes one cent or one Euro with it.

That's why I wrote direct transfer.

It will only be temporarily simpler and cheaper to just email them as copyright owner so they will (for sure) remove it for while.

But should then keep on happening again, a C&D is a very potent method, even if appearing expensive at first. Even if a civil court will likely expect a settlement, that costs martins more money than he will eventually get.

Violating a C&D is VERY expensive for softonic. Then it will not be about how much money softonic made by the ad-ware, but about violating a valid contract between martins and softonic. And civil judges don't do jokes about such a violation. This will then be a punishment based on softonics assets.

So you can be sure, after a C&D, softonic will mark Orbiter as "don't touch" in its company knowledge base.

"For sure"? I'll believe it when I see it working out.

Which is not in our hands, anyway. Martin has to decide if he goes that route or not.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

There's no shortage of people selling Orbiter unfortunately. There's almost no point in posting about them individually. I think by now and from older threads, Martin knows that Orbiter shows up daily on eBay for example. (Or used to anyways)

Tried to find it on Ebay, but no such luck. I do see someone trying to sell Celestia though

 

[Face]

So, you're right, it is just OVP on SF now. :thumbup:

I think it always was just OVP, never Orbiter per se. Those binaries were prerequisites for OVP. I don't think that a full Orbiter release was there, just betas or diff binaries.

Good point on the Wiki links, though!

 

[orb]

I don't think that a full Orbiter release was there, just betas or diff binaries.

There were only betas (patches) and additionally high resolution Moon and Mars textures.

 

[Matias Saibene]

I have written to Softonic.com (for other reasons), and I have receive a cordially response. I think so would Softonic attend a complaint / claim of Martin.
Softonic is a company in Spain that through your page (Softonic.com) distributed software. It has a very active blog about software, and another blog about games, in addition to the download page.
Softonic allows downloading using two methods:

1 -. their downloader (with some ads, and optional downloads).

. 2 - download from the author's website.

I insist that they will solve the demand of Martin.
Softonic was where I met Orbiter, including in your site have explained some of the benefits (realistic simulation, ability to add mods, etc) of Orbiter.

EDIT: I've seen the Softonic homepage (which is in Spanish), and says it Orbiter is GPL (again), have even written that the author is "Medphys"!!.
After seeing this I think Softonic is a somewhat cluttered page he makes the grave mistake of confused the authors and licenses:facepalm:.

 

[Face]

EDIT: I've seen the Softonic homepage (which is in Spanish), and says it Orbiter is GPL (again), have even written that the author is "Medphys"!!.
After seeing this I think Softonic is a somewhat cluttered page he makes the grave mistake of confused the authors and licenses:facepalm:.

I don't see a developer mentioned there, the appropriate field is empty. TBH, I think they did not take the time to read the license terms at all.

Also, where is the direct download link? I don't see one. The "alternative download" link is pointing to the OVP Sourceforge site.

It is starting to look like they also mistook OVP for Orbiter itself. Which is kind of strange, as it is clearly labelled "Orbiter Visualization Project".

 

[Matias Saibene]

I don't see a developer mentioned there, the appropriate field is empty. TBH, I think they did not take the time to read the license terms at all.

Also, where is the direct download link? I don't see one. The "alternative download" link is pointing to the OVP Sourceforge site.

It is starting to look like they also mistook OVP for Orbiter itself. Which is kind of strange, as it is clearly labelled "Orbiter Visualization Project".

On page Softonic in Spanish, it is mentioned that the author of Orbiter is Medphys and its license is GPL:facepalm:.

 

[Face]

On page Softonic in Spanish, it is mentioned that the author of Orbiter is Medphys and its license is GPL.

I see. Yet on the English page you posted a link to, the field "developer" seems to be empty, at least when rendered with Firefox. Just another point in the "dubious" category in my book.

 

[Linguofreak]

Orbiter is licensed freeware AFAIK, free for use but intelectually the property of the good Doctor. The main reason for this is to allow coordinated standard releases,

Significant forks of open source projects are actually fairly rare and tend to end in either an eventual remerge or the death of one project or the other. So the coordinated standard releases thing is less of an issue than one might think.

& to keep scumbag types from selling Orbiter as a "games pack". Having the program licensed means that Mr. Schweiger could prosecute them if he wanted, whereas the creators of Flightgear cannot.

Flightgear is under the GPL (v3, I believe, though they make it less clear than I'd like), and it's actually fairly difficult to make money off of selling GPL'ed software by the copy (even though the GPL allows you to try), because the GPL only allows you to redistribute GPL'ed software under certain terms, including that the license you redistribute it under has to offer the same or better terms to the end user. Which means there's no way that you can prevent people who buy your version from turning around and making it available to their friends for free (since you have to give them the right to redistribute it, otherwise you're in violation of the license and lose permission to redistribute the software).

The GPLv3 also allows you to require that author attributions or legal notices be preserved, or to prohibit misrepresentation of the origin of the software, so if Orbiter were licensed under the GPLv3 (I'm not holding my breath, and, for certain reasons, I don't think the GPL specifically would be a good choice of license if Orbiter were open sourced), Martin could require the preservation of the copyright notices and links to orbitersim.com on the launchpad and splash screen, and anyone who distributed a version of orbiter without those notices (by which a user could find out that Orbiter is available for free) could be prosecuted for copyright infringement.

You can use and distribute GPL'ed software commercially, but the way it's set up prevents the most abusive things that happen when software is sold for profit.

 

[Topper]

Orbiter is open source, then how can I get the code.
I really want build my own orbiter! THX.

Before you are allowed to see the source code, you need to learn about the source of the probe. For that, you need to hail the probe every day for many, many years. Then, after you attain the enlightenment, and if Martin allows you, and after you have passed the holy examination of the probe, maybe you are allowed to see the source code.


Hail The Probe!

 

[martins]

You can use and distribute GPL'ed software commercially, but the way it's set up prevents the most abusive things that happen when software is sold for profit.

Well, if you look at the endless ebay listings of Celestia, for example (never under its actual name), the license notice at the end of each listing invariably says something to the effect of "We are entitled to sell this, because it's GPL. By the way, any reproduction, duplication or resale of this CD-ROM is prohibited."

Not exactly the spirit of GPL, methinks ... They justify this by adding some bogus installer software with a non-free license.

This selling off of GPL software seems fairly well organised. There are "dropship" companies who sell the complete listing to the resellers, including the listing page, screenshots, and (presumably) the CD image to be shipped. Many of the listings from different sellers are virtually identical. Only the prices differ.

I came into contact with this whole shady business a while ago when I was complaining to ebay about numerous Orbiter listings. The response I got from some resellers after the complaints (apart from sporadic abuse) was something like "hang on, who are you? I paid money for this package, and was told it's ok to resell it." Apparently enough resellers then complained to the responsible middle men for them to take Orbiter out of their sortiment. I have checked a few times, and Orbiter doesn't seem to show on ebay anymore. Making the Orbiter license more explicit may also have helped.

But if your software is GPL licensed, I don't know if you can convince ebay to pull the listings. I guess you just grow a thick skin and ignore the parasites ...

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Before you are allowed to see the source code, you need to learn about the source of the probe.

The source of the Probe is the Probe. The almighty self compiled the universe using his own holy API, but the almighty is his own source, perfectly compiled in an infinite loop of logic beyond our understanding!

 

[Linguofreak]

Well, if you look at the endless ebay listings of Celestia, for example (never under its actual name), the license notice at the end of each listing invariably says something to the effect of "We are entitled to sell this, because it's GPL. By the way, any reproduction, duplication or resale of this CD-ROM is prohibited."

Not exactly the spirit of GPL, methinks ... They justify this by adding some bogus installer software with a non-free license.

Depending on the details, it may be more than just "not exactly the spirit of the GPL", it may be a flat out violation.

Insofar as the copy of Celestia installed by their CD is unmodified from the stock Celestia distribution, their prohibition on reproduction, duplication, or resale can only apply to their installer, and not to the program itself:

Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.

Celestia is under GPLv2, GPLv3 contains similar language.

Plus, if they're complying with the GPL, they have to provide some means of access to the Celestia source (and the source for any of their own modifications), thus giving the user the ability to build and distribute their own copy of the binaries (including any modifications). If they don't do that, they're violating the GPL and lose permission to redistribute Celestia.