
Solaris 11 Source Leaked  - rbanffy
http://0xfeedface.org/blog/lattera/2011-12-19/solaris-11-source-leaked
======
mindstab
> I'm sure FreeBSD and IllumOS developers alike are researching the legality
> of incorporating the leaked code.

There isn't any legality. Do you remember the waste of time and money that was
the SCO case against IBM for possibly incorporating SCO unix code into Linux.
This leak is a leak of stolen IP and no one can legally use it, very plain and
simple.

This won't hurt them much other than to embarrass them a little.

~~~
bcantrill
Well, it depends if the CDDL has been stripped off the files or not. If the
CDDL has been stripped off and replaced with anything that denotes that the
source is now a trade secret, then yes -- it's stolen IP. But if the CDDL is
still there, the situation will be murky, and I would hope that Oracle would
clarify it one way or the other. Remember, this is not simply a proprietary
system, it's a system (1) that was open source not very long ago (2) that was
closed without a public announcement of any kind and (3) for which an internal
commitment was made to make the source code available after Solaris 11
shipped. [1] Point is: this isn't SCO by a long shot.

[1] [http://smartos.org/2011/12/15/fork-yeah-the-rise-and-
develop...](http://smartos.org/2011/12/15/fork-yeah-the-rise-and-development-
of-illumos-2/)

------
trotsky
_I'm glad the source has leaked. It serves Oracle right. They've proved that
all they care about is greed._

What a dick, I hope he doesn't make a living doing anything related to
software.

 _I'm sure FreeBSD and IllumOS developers alike are researching the legality
of incorporating the leaked code._

Yeah, that's clearly not going to be happening.

~~~
dman
I agree, this does not end up helping any open source products at all. In fact
this increases the chances of companies using FUD to target the OSS solaris
efforts.

------
bri3d
A better link would have been [http://openindiana.org/pipermail/openindiana-
discuss/2011-De...](http://openindiana.org/pipermail/openindiana-
discuss/2011-December/006542.html) (OpenSolaris mailing list thread) or even
[http://news.softpedia.com/news/Oracle-Solaris-11-Kernel-
Sour...](http://news.softpedia.com/news/Oracle-Solaris-11-Kernel-Source-
Leaked-241597.shtml) , which is at least a somewhat-researched article,
instead of the current awful blog post, which contains both baseless
speculation and no original or useful information.

~~~
rbanffy
Thanks for posting the links.

------
vondur
I thought most of the source code was open via OpenSolaris?

~~~
wmf
Oracle stopped publishing their changes a while ago.

------
twoodfin
The linked presentation looks like a great, opinionated piece of OS and Sun
history. It's too bad Google Video went away, since being able to easily
download presentations like this for offline viewing was a useful feature.

------
aw3c2
Flame bait, content void post. If you are interested, "solaris11.tar.bz2",
~104MB. Not more information on the linked source or the linked source's
sources either.

------
adamleventhal
It's a thorny legal issue, all right. I'll need to refer to the case of
Finders v. Keepers.

------
omouse
If you're complaining about the legality of incorporating the leaked code, you
aren't ready for a world where free software rules. The end game of free and,
to a lesser extent, of open source software is to live in a world where
copyright and patents no longer apply to software. Basically, software will be
treated like mathematics.

Incorporating the leaked code if it is indeed highly useful brings us closer
to that world. It's forced expropriation but I think we need some of that,
especially since companies like Oracle are trying to limit how much open
source software they produce.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's an outlaw version of FreeBSD or IllumOS
that's released over Freenet or Bittorrent or patches are encrypted and traded
over IRC if the leaked code proves to be very useful. In fact I would _hope_
that that happens.

~~~
laconian
Said outlaw software would be considered utterly radioactive by any
corporation. It wouldn't get legs, especially when there are so many free
alternatives that are unburdened by their illegal provenance.

~~~
omouse
That's okay. Free/open source software in general is still considered to be
utterly radioactive but there's enough developers out there willing to work
with and on it that it isn't a problem. There's no reason why we should let
corporations direct what we use and work on all the time ;)

~~~
rbanffy
> Free/open source software in general is still considered to be utterly
> radioactive

On what planet exactly do you live?

~~~
omouse
The one where less than 99% of software is free/open source and where
proprietary software is still considered a viable option unfortunately.

~~~
rbanffy
I thought you said you came from one where free software is radioactive.

