If all the GPL violations have been rectified, then there is no real problem. The OP did mention GPL violations.

I agree with all that. I mean there was a time (when I was young) when I too didn't care much for ethics, I would let things pass even tho they were unethical. But at one point after much thinking and observation I realized that this is a very bad idea. Why ? Because a lack of ethics hurts everyone and brings us one step closer to hell on earth.

At first I thought that surely closing one eye and letting someone pass with doing something unethical is no big deal. Well, I recommend to everyone to visit a country where ethics is not in high regard, then you will know why it is important. It isn't government or laws that holds society together as it is respect among people and the want to do the right thing and to stop those who wish to circumvent this. If ethics is not held in high regard, it's easy for someone to sneak by unnoticed or with people making small allowances, take the power, and wield it like a tyrant. And this happens all too often.

And again I say that ethics is more than just something you read in old, dusty books. Ethics is what is right, what is logical, in spite of what the books or anyone says. In fact many ethics professors have told me that the most ethical people sometimes must choose to disobey a law in order to do what is right ... think oppression here ... Fascists, Communists, etc. They achieved their goals mainly because people refused to disobey orders and followed them blindly till the end. Don't think the GPL is the set-in-stone constitution of GNU/Linux. It may be the constitution in most cases, but can be changed and has to be changed to adapt to fix problems, etc.

I also believe that even if you do not abide by any ethical theory that has been yet stated, to at least have a code of honor. I personally don't fully agree with many ethical theories or stances, but I do have my own stance as either an amalgam of other theories or new ones that I feel are right. Either way, all must have a code of honor, even one you write yourself if it makes sense, just so you don't let them push you to do the wrong thing, or let them push you out of the way so they can do the wrong thing to you and others.

Basically, I'm saying that what is needed is self-policing on the basis of ethics. If we know what is right and we not only help others do the right thing but stop them from doing the wrong thing, then I think this would render government nearly obsolete (not something the gov wants of course). If everyone understood the way things work, the way the world works, and the truth behind it, then we wouldn't need government, nor war, nor suffering. It would be a heaven on earth. So really it all rests on ethics and on each of us to understand it and abide by it for our own sakes.

This whole focus on ethics here is misguided. I want to post something from early in this thread, because it says it very well:

Bingo. The whole point of the GPL is to allow for the possibility of a fork. In and of itself, forking a project is NOT an unethical act. It is something the GPL allows, and in my opinion, encourages. Yeah, Pat puts a megaton of hard work into Slackware. However, if people are demanding a 64bit version of Slackware, and Pat chooses not to provide it, nobody should be surprised if Slackware gets forked. Does Pat get screwed in the process. Yeah, he does. And that is the ugly side of the GPL. Arny forked Slackware, and in the process got some things wrong and pissed off a lot of people. Honestly, is what Arny is doing any different than what CentOS is doing to RHEL? I don't see anyone condemning CentOS as unethical. Maybe its just that CentOS's scripts were better than Arny's and they paid more attention to detail.

This whole thread is descending into a "We know Arny is guilty of something, we just can't figure out what".

lol, well, that's why at one point I said:

Still, I say that the focus on ethics is not at all misguided, because we cannot argue that he is still violating the GPL, as he is not.

We have to blame him for something ...

No, seriously, surely even you can see there is a good deal of unholyness here done by arny. I would have chosen to let this thread get buried because it wasn't getting anywhere, and it seems arny did feel guilty and donated to Slackware as a result ... so maybe something positive did come out of it and maybe arny will try to be more considerate and careful in the future.

One thing that I cannot stand is people who even when confronted with evidence of their actions, deny it. My mother does this all the time, it seriously pisses me off.

I'm not arguing that arny didn't screw up big time. He obviously did and should be held accountable to fix those screw-ups. However, the tone of some of the posts really alarms me because it suggests that the GPL (well, open source licenses in general) are subordinate to some code of ethics. However, whose ethics? Mine? Yours? Onebucks? Dick Cheney's? Barak Obama's? And who will arbitrate what is or is not ethical when there is a legitimate dispute? George Carlin is no longer with us, and he might be the only person I would trust to do the job. The fact is that unless the ethics are clearly defined, the only thing we have to go on are the licenses, because good people with good intentions will disagree on ethics. If arny violated licenses, then by all means, hold his feet to the fire until he fixes the problems. But if all anyone can pin on him are nebulous charges of behavior that violates unstated codes of ethics, then we need to let him off the hook.

Is the following not ethical enough?
Excerpted from The Free Software Philosophy

Forget it

This thread is a very interesting read.
I think a judgment about whether or not someone violated ethics is problematic at best. As previously mentioned ethics depend a lot on one's point of view and the set of ethical principles one if using. If we can't agree on a universal set of ethical principles that govern violations of the GPL then making a decision about ethical behaviour is impossible.
I think the guiding point of this discussion should be whether or not arny violated the GPL.

Well, I don't think there's any question that he DID violate the GPL at one point, however not currently.

The decision about whether there was a violation or not, should also include the terms of the Copyright. The GPL wording supports some extra provisions or restrictions which are not specifically part of the GPL. That doesn't mean that it supports just *any* extra provisions, but any extra provisions which do not violate the GPL itself are supported. Provisions like the inclusion of the original Copyright notice is what I'm referring to. That's where Arny had 'messed up' with the over-use of sed, by changing all references of Slackware when the original Copyright notice should not have been changed.

I did not feel guilty, I donated because I did it in the past and promised that I will in the future too.

About the Copyright. That people instead of reporting directly back to me that there is a bug they preferred to make it public. I accidentally noticed after the Linux.com interview comments was closed so and in the next minutes the fix was made. Please note that I'm working alone here (compile, test, upload etc) and mistakes can appear. If that person who discovered the bug reports back to me then this discussions are useless. BUT here are other things, some people out there are envious, this is the big problem, they love to spread what bad BW64 is and what made. I just made what I have discussed with Pat when I started the project and respect to not use Slackware name in the project.

CentOS is making the same thing, forking and removing RedHat name from the distro and re branding it as Hangdog42 says.

So, in the future to make everyone happy please send reports directly to me to be fixed ASAP .

Sorry, I don't think this thread helps anybody on anything. If one thinks Arny did something bad, either tell him privately or (if it caused one a damage) sue him. In my ethic there is no room for self-appointed judges or jury.

Ahhhh...... So close. I keep waiting for this thread to encroach upon Godwin's Law.....

That's about the only interesting thing about this thread.... Waiting for someone to say the 6 letter word....

Other than that, I give this one a 5 yawn rating.

Quite embarrassing to the Slackware community if you ask me. Get over it already.

Hi,

Original copyright arny! Inclusion without modification? Appending notices of your work or adaptation to said work without passing as work done by self.

It has nothing to do about working alone. You should properly distribute as per the GPL not by presenting something as your own. If you would include within existing notices then the problem(s) would not exist. This is not a bug that we are speaking of but a malicious change to something then presenting as work by yourself.

Because someone else does something wrong doesn't allow someone else to continue. Modify the software as per the GPL and copyright. It wouldn't hurt to learn a little about ethics, morality and even general good will.

BTW, envy has nothing to do with how this problem is being addressed. Just pure right and wrong!

Hi,
Everyone has the right to present their opinion. If you feel there is something wrong with opinions or even providing insight to problems then I for one won't put my head in the sand next to yours. No one is being a self appointed judge with these matters for the GPL or copyright. If you cannot see the issue then why cloud it with social demeanor? This is a forum and the open clear discussion will aid everyone. arny included.