NZ-developed R software exploited by US company: creator
LATEST NEWS
- Video will drive UFB uptake, but NZ lacks content choices: ComCom || 1
- TelstraClear's half-year revenue drops by 4 percent, but telco posts $1m profit
- Peter Finch leaves CIO post at Gen-i || 1
- 2degrees announces 875,656 customers
- NZ Fauna app fills 'crazy' lack of animal info || 4
- Megaupload interest a mixed blessing for Pirate Party || 2
SUBSCRIBE
Computerworld is New Zealand's only specialised information systems fortnightly. Subscribe now for $100 (23 issues) and save more than 37% off the cover price!
SIGN UP
Open source license not adhered to says NZ academic
By Sarah Putt | Auckland | Thursday, 22 July, 2010 | 10 Comments
The co-creator of an internationally recognised statistical program called R claims a US company is in exploiting the program’s open source licence.
R is a kind of super-sized calculator that is used in statistical applications for industries as diverse as pharmaceuticals, stock broking and telecommunications. It has a General Public Licence (GPL), which means that anyone can alter it on the condition that they reveal the source code.
And for almost two decades that is what thousands, possibly millions of people (it is impossible to tell how many, because R is free), have done. But now a US company Revolution Analytics is changing R, and – according to co-creator Ross Ihaka – not adhering to the terms of the GPL. Ihaka wants to sue the company, but he doesn’t have the $100,000 he thinks he will need to take legal action.
Revolution Analytics CEO Norman Nie rebuts the claim that the company is in breach of R’s GPL. In an email to Computerworld he said Revolution Analytics has an ‘Open Core’ business model. “While ‘Open Core’ may not always be popular with open source advocates because it does involve proprietary licences, the model has been reviewed and approved by the general legal counsel of the Open Source initiative as being fully GPL-compatible.”
As for the other creator of R, Robert Gentleman, he declined to comment publicly about the stousch. He is now based in the US and was appointed to the board of Revolution Analytics earlier this year. Next month he will accept the inaugural Statistical Computing and Graphics award from the American Statistical Association given to both him and Ihaka in recognition of R.
Now online: The Story of R: a statistical tale with a twist
Comments
Problem not about open core business model
An open core business model can be compatible with the GPL but that is not what is in question here. The issue is - does Revolution Analytic's use of R code comply with the copyright conditions of that code. Of course, if Revolution Analytics had written all of R themselves they would be free to do whatever they wanted. But you can only use other people's code under the terms they release it under.
Posted by Anonymous at 9:52:01 on July 26, 2010
Posted by Anonymous at 9:52:01 on July 26, 2010
Fraudlent Statement
The following statement has nothing to do with the problem at hand.
"Revolution Analytics CEO Norman Nie rebuts the claim that the company is in breach of R's GPL. In an email to Computerworld he said Revolution Analytics has an 'Open Core' business model. "While 'Open Core' may not always be popular with open source advocates because it does involve proprietary licences, the model has been reviewed and approved by the general legal counsel of the Open Source initiative as being fully GPL-compatible.""
What is being discuss is copyright infringement and not a business model.
Put it simply they are doing the same as the people who share music and video without authorization, but because it's a company most people dismiss it.
Posted by John Smith at 8:50:44 on July 25, 2010
"Revolution Analytics CEO Norman Nie rebuts the claim that the company is in breach of R's GPL. In an email to Computerworld he said Revolution Analytics has an 'Open Core' business model. "While 'Open Core' may not always be popular with open source advocates because it does involve proprietary licences, the model has been reviewed and approved by the general legal counsel of the Open Source initiative as being fully GPL-compatible.""
What is being discuss is copyright infringement and not a business model.
Put it simply they are doing the same as the people who share music and video without authorization, but because it's a company most people dismiss it.
Posted by John Smith at 8:50:44 on July 25, 2010
Copyright Infringement
This is related with copyright law. They are require by law according with GPL to release any modifications to the code under the same license.
What is happening here is that Revolution R is not doing that! They are in violation of GPL and in accordance with it they have lost any rights to continuing distributing their products.
If they ignore the GPL, then they are in breach on general copyright law, they have created a derivative work and have violated the copyright of every contributor of R, that means thousands of them. If any of them decides to sue then Revolution R might have to pay millions in compensation.
The link that the author provided has nothing to do with R or Revolution R, nor anything to do with copyright law.
Posted by John Smith at 8:45:15 on July 25, 2010
What is happening here is that Revolution R is not doing that! They are in violation of GPL and in accordance with it they have lost any rights to continuing distributing their products.
If they ignore the GPL, then they are in breach on general copyright law, they have created a derivative work and have violated the copyright of every contributor of R, that means thousands of them. If any of them decides to sue then Revolution R might have to pay millions in compensation.
The link that the author provided has nothing to do with R or Revolution R, nor anything to do with copyright law.
Posted by John Smith at 8:45:15 on July 25, 2010
R Derivatives?
If the software that Revolution Analytics developed are modules for R, that rely on R to be functional, do they fall under the derivatives area of the GPL?
Either way, I am sure the FSF would be happy to look at it if there is a conflict.
Posted by Ard Righ at 11:09:57 on July 23, 2010
Either way, I am sure the FSF would be happy to look at it if there is a conflict.
Posted by Ard Righ at 11:09:57 on July 23, 2010
Seems fine to me...
If the guys who created R didn't want to make money from it that is fine, - why are they trying to sue people who are?
It seems Revolution Analytics are a company, not a charity, so they have to make revenue in at least a semi-competitive manner - and have been spending money on compliance lawyers which doesn't seem cheap either.
Their website also lists the modified source for R, just not the additional modules.
Posted by MCKEEN316 at 12:29:39 on July 22, 2010
It seems Revolution Analytics are a company, not a charity, so they have to make revenue in at least a semi-competitive manner - and have been spending money on compliance lawyers which doesn't seem cheap either.
Their website also lists the modified source for R, just not the additional modules.
Posted by MCKEEN316 at 12:29:39 on July 22, 2010
Seems fine to me...
"It seems Revolution Analytics are a company, not a charity, so they have to make revenue in at least a semi-competitive manner - and have been spending money on compliance lawyers which doesn't seem cheap either."
It seems then that they should respect copyright law too! Don't you think?
They released it under the GPL, not under public domain, their objective was not "not making money", their objective was and is a set of rights: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Posted by jack at 14:13:09 on July 22, 2010
It seems then that they should respect copyright law too! Don't you think?
They released it under the GPL, not under public domain, their objective was not "not making money", their objective was and is a set of rights: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Posted by jack at 14:13:09 on July 22, 2010
Seems fine to me...
"If the guys who created R didn't want to make money from it that is fine, - why are they trying to sue people who are?"
I suggest you actually read up on the free software movement. The answer is sort of a fundamental concept.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_movement
Posted by Mr Magoo at 14:11:55 on July 22, 2010
I suggest you actually read up on the free software movement. The answer is sort of a fundamental concept.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_movement
Posted by Mr Magoo at 14:11:55 on July 22, 2010
He should report them
http://www.fsf.org/about/licensing/licenses/gpl-violation.html
first he should check this page out, He can get help, and maybe they could even fight for him.
Posted by dave at 12:17:37 on July 22, 2010
first he should check this page out, He can get help, and maybe they could even fight for him.
Posted by dave at 12:17:37 on July 22, 2010
For more info
Please see the company's web site here:
http://www.revolutionanalytics.com/downloads/gpl-sources.php
Posted by Revolution Analytics at 3:56:28 on July 22, 2010
Please see the company's web site here:
http://www.revolutionanalytics.com/downloads/gpl-sources.php
Posted by Revolution Analytics at 3:56:28 on July 22, 2010
Not the whole story
Any software distribution which includes R MUST include full source to all R-related components. That is what the GPL requires. Last time I looked, Revolution was only providing source to some of the components in their distribution. They are, of course, permitted to distribute their software under any terms, provided it is done in a distribution independent of R. This is not what they are doing.
Posted by An R Author at 10:48:25 on July 23, 2010
Posted by An R Author at 10:48:25 on July 23, 2010
MOST POPULAR
Social Media @Computerworld NZ
Computerworld NZ has now reached LinkedIn! Join to expand your networks and meet others interested in information systems.
