3 ms·

Personally I don't see what people are complaining about here. He took an open source project, with a licence that permitted it, and made it a commercial projec

Personally I don't see what people are complaining about here. He took an open source project, with a licence that permitted it, and made it a commercial project by adding chances and forming a derivative work. There is no foul play here. If someone else wants to fork the project and try and mimic the new commercial features they're free to do so. Don't expect the original developers to help you though. They're already set on their own path.

benatkin 15y ago
It became popular because it was open source and the community built the brand recognition. Now he went and took the brand recognition to do something that the community didn't expect and doesn't approve of.
- hmottestad 15y ago
  So the question is. Can you make a fork and call it "Growl" or would the "new" growl try to sue the hell out of you?
  - patrickod 15y ago
    If you use the latest BSD released version then you're ok. The code is free for public use. Were you to make it commercial though I think you would be liable as you would need the explicit permission of the original owner to do so. EDIT: It seems after further research the license that was being used prohibits the name "Growl" being used to promote any derivative works of the same name without explicit permission from the original owners. [1] - http://growl.info/documentation/developer/bsd-license.txt http://growl.info/documentation/developer/bsd-license.txt
    - masklinn 15y ago
      > If you use the latest BSD released version then you're ok. No, I doubt the naming falls under source release. See Firefox.
    - rmc 15y ago
      Were you to make it commercial though I think you would be liable as you would need the explicit permission of the original owner to do so. Just about every open source licence, include the BSD released code, explictly gives you the permission to sell the software. If the original author released Growl 10 years under an open source licence then they gave you the permission to sell it commerically then. The name is complicated and usually falls under trademark law, and hence you probably could be sued for claiming that your fork is "Growl" when the average person thinks that only $ORIGINAL_AUTHOR can release "Growl".
  - p0ckets 15y ago
    Maybe. Forsythe might have some claim to the trademark for "Growl", but things like the Growl Network Protocol should weaken it. Note that the copyright on the code and the trademark on "Growl" are separate issues.

benatkin 15y ago

It became popular because it was open source and the community built the brand recognition. Now he went and took the brand recognition to do something that the community didn't expect and doesn't approve of.

hmottestad 15y ago
So the question is. Can you make a fork and call it "Growl" or would the "new" growl try to sue the hell out of you?
- patrickod 15y ago
  If you use the latest BSD released version then you're ok. The code is free for public use. Were you to make it commercial though I think you would be liable as you would need the explicit permission of the original owner to do so. EDIT: It seems after further research the license that was being used prohibits the name "Growl" being used to promote any derivative works of the same name without explicit permission from the original owners. [1] - http://growl.info/documentation/developer/bsd-license.txt http://growl.info/documentation/developer/bsd-license.txt
  - masklinn 15y ago
    > If you use the latest BSD released version then you're ok. No, I doubt the naming falls under source release. See Firefox.
  - rmc 15y ago
    Were you to make it commercial though I think you would be liable as you would need the explicit permission of the original owner to do so. Just about every open source licence, include the BSD released code, explictly gives you the permission to sell the software. If the original author released Growl 10 years under an open source licence then they gave you the permission to sell it commerically then. The name is complicated and usually falls under trademark law, and hence you probably could be sued for claiming that your fork is "Growl" when the average person thinks that only $ORIGINAL_AUTHOR can release "Growl".
- p0ckets 15y ago
  Maybe. Forsythe might have some claim to the trademark for "Growl", but things like the Growl Network Protocol should weaken it. Note that the copyright on the code and the trademark on "Growl" are separate issues.