From 352fcbae6e607311dc39fe2976eb1ada93bd5e9d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Roberto Rosario <roberto.rosario.gonzalez@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 02:20:04 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] GPL violations update

---
 index.html | 4 ++++
 news.html  | 6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)

diff --git a/index.html b/index.html
index d397a83e5d..7ad001287a 100644
--- a/index.html
+++ b/index.html
@@ -157,6 +157,10 @@
 		<div class="col last">
 			<h3>Latest <span class="red">news</span></h3>
 				<ul class="news" style="margin-bottom: 3em;">
+					<li style="margin-bottom: 1em;">
+						<h4><span class="red">August 28, 2012</span></h4>
+						<div style="font-size: 10px;"><h4>GPL violations, update.</h4><a href="news.html#20120828">Read more</a></div>
+					</li>	
 					<li style="margin-bottom: 1em;">
 						<h4><span class="red">August 27, 2012</span></h4>
 						<div style="font-size: 10px;"><h4>GPL violations.</h4><a href="news.html#20120827">Read more</a></div>
diff --git a/news.html b/news.html
index b5a60a8c09..35bbe20dba 100644
--- a/news.html
+++ b/news.html
@@ -96,6 +96,12 @@
 
 	<div class="wrap">
 		<ul class="piramid_bullets news">
+			<li>
+				<a href="#20120828"><h3><span class="red">August 28, 2012</span></h3></a>
+				<h4>GPL violations, update</h4>
+				<p>To all the people telling me to f****** learn to read and to RTFM the <strong>GPL</strong>: I have read the <strong>GPL</strong>, this is not my first project being released as <strong>Free software</strong>, as <strong>Open Source software</strong> or under the <strong>GPL</strong> (<a href="http://code.google.com/p/descartes-bi/">Descartes BI</a>, <a href="https://github.com/rosarior/django-replication">Django-replication</a>, <a href="https://github.com/rosarior/pdf-form-fill">pdf-form-fill</a>).  It is also not the first project to enjoy wide spread use and to be released as a commercial product by other people (<a href="https://github.com/rosarior/django-inventory">Django-inventory</a>), however in those instances the people doing the forks have complied with the <strong>GPL</strong> admirably providing source code for their changes, retaining all copyrights, notices and original license even when being released under a different name.  That however is not the situation that is happening now.  This is not "whinnying over some little program" (as it is being described commonly in the feedback I'm getting via email), the <strong>GPL</strong> is no less legal than a commercial license and must be followed and enforced equally, <strong>Mayan EDMS</strong> is not some "little program" currently sporting 26,000 lines of code.  And just because a program is being released as <strong>Free Open Source</strong> software doesn't make it any less valuable as a commercial counterpart.  Finally the entire source was not removed, only the development branch and the hotfix branch for the next version.  Let me repeat that again, the entire source code was <strong>NOT</strong> removed only the <strong>TWO (2)</strong> latest unreleased branches.  Lastly about the commercial competition issue: If I have no problems with people or business making money off Mayan EDMS, in fact I proud myself in creating commercial opportunities to others by advertising them in right here in this very website, on the top menu, three tabs to the right.  I hope this clarifies and overturns some of the misinformation being circulated, thank you.<p/>
+			</li>				
+
 			<li>
 				<a href="#20120827"><h3><span class="red">August 27, 2012</span></h3></a>
 				<h4>GPL violations</h4>