OpenGD77

I don't think it is fair to attack Andrew, KC7RBW, in this fashion.

He is acting reasonably in his request for the GPLv2 source code to be made freely available. That is the reason for the GPL to exist in the first place. It is important for software developers to understand their rights and obligations under the licences that apply to the software that they use, write and distribute. It is OUR rights as end users of GPL software that Andrew (KC7RBW) is seeking to uphold. The GPL exists to protect our rights, not the rights of the software developers.

The dependency on non-free binary blobs is a tricky one. The only way I see around that is to make it the responsibility of the end-user to combine the non-free blobs with the free software themselves. That would produce a non-distributable derivative product that could be programmed into the radio by the end-user (i.e. us). This would be similar to the way non-free graphics drivers are handled by Linux distributions. It is the responsibility of the end-user to avail themselves of the non-free GPU drivers and integrate it into their GNU/Linux installation. The GPL empowers them to do this, as they (we) can do anything they (we) want with GPL software as long as they (we) do not distribute it.

I hope that there is a way out of this hole and a will to find it. That way out may depend on the source code being made available to us all.

Cheers, 73
Darren, G0HWW

What is the future of OpenGD?

VK3KYY wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 18, 2021 10:28 am

The official firmware sections are not just closed source they are hacked from a protected encrypted binary file.
If the manufacturer was not chinese, and not benefiting from extra sales of their hardware, this project would have been slapped with a shutdown order a long time

That is quite interesting, I did not realize that.

VK3KYY wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 18, 2021 10:28 am

And forget about asking Radioddity for permission, they don't own the source code, neither do TYT. The firmware appears to be written by a separate / unknown chinese company who also writes the firmware for the DM-1801 and RD-5R.
Radioddity won't tell me who this company are, its likely to be a branch of the Chinese state apparatus.

Maybe, but I doubt it. But whomever the copyright owner is, it seems that they have no interest of enforcing their copyright.

KC7RBW wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:31 pm

The remedy is to release the source code for the builds you already distributed.

I don't understand what you are talking about. The source code was free to download on github, so it was released?

KC7RBW wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:31 pm

Yes, it's still a problem that the firmware uses a binary blob owned by DVSI, but you're not likely to get in trouble for that because everyone who bought a GD-77 or similar radio already paid the license fee for the AMBE codec.

As far as I know, the codec sits in a chip in the radio, this is how the licence is enforced. I think that the binary blobs do not correspond to the codec and its patents, but to the way the various chips are managed.

Possibly, but I don't know, what happened is the following:
DVSI (the proprietor of the AMBE codecs and holder of the associated chips) is known to be secretive. They may have imposed a non-disclosure agreement to whomever wrote the binary blobs in question to make the GD-77 work.
The writer of the binary blobs therefore cannot give VK3KYY the source code of their blob, because the NDA with DVSI prohibits that.
OTOH, the same writer of the binary blobs has no interest in enforcing their copyright, because the free software sells more radios. So we are in limbo.

do1jml wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 19, 2021 5:57 pm

I don't understand what you are talking about. The source code was free to download on github, so it was released?

Hi!
The source was released until the first incident with "profiteering" reported by Roger. Since then, the updates were released in binary only. The only changes which were updated to the source repo were related to language files, to allow translators to add new phrases etc. The source archives which were present together with binary releases, were not updated and contained old material, so if you compiled them, you got a different (older) version than the accompanying binary file.
With regards,
Pavel OK1PT

The final option as far as I see...

Having this project AWAY fron GitHub or others like them and only accept contributions whom agree and understanding the complete scenario...

All the rest is a waste of time in vane comments.

EA3BIL wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 19, 2021 7:27 pm

The final option as far as I see...

Having this project AWAY fron GitHub or others like them and only accept contributions whom agree and understanding the complete scenario...

Such a project would probably need a different name.

The source code will be released soon, however I will need to remove some private code which is not released, for various new functions and enhancements.

Under the terms of the Open Source license, it is still not possible for me, or anyone else to publish releases from the firmware, the Open Source license requires that all sources to the firmware release be available, and this is not possible because the firmware binary file is 30% from the closed source official firmware.

Perhaps someone intends to write a patching loader, but this would require more work, which I'm not willing to do.

Overall, the mistake with the software license has finally killed the project for me.

Pretty sure from Rogers comment above that it's dead

VK3KYY wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 19, 2021 9:02 pm

The source code will be released soon, however I will need to remove some private code which is not released, for various new functions and enhancements.

IMHO the reason why OpenGD77 became so popular is that it is (was?) open source. Please keep it open source. For example, open source WSJT is a success, but closed source ROS protocol is dead.

I don't see a bright future for a closed source version.

VK3KYY wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 19, 2021 9:02 pm

Under the terms of the Open Source license, it is still not possible for me, or anyone else to publish releases from the firmware, the Open Source license requires that all sources to the firmware release be available, and this is not possible because the firmware binary file is 30% from the closed source official firmware.

Did anyone complain when OpenGD77 still was fully open source?

The 30% BLOB is used like an external library (via the wrappers). That's not a problem. And if the inclusion of that BLOB into the .sgl file must be done in some other way, that's not a problem. For example, a simple script using the "dd" command would do the job easily.