This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Justin Frankel Resigns From Nullsoft
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.
Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.
Justin Frankel (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember talking to the guy on IRC years ago when he was working on his old 3D engine, Plush.
Time sure flies!
One doesn't have to wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)
He's probably just pissed that what he works on gets the "Copyright AOL/Time Warner" header on it, and understandably so.
Suprisingly he lasted this long (Score:5, Interesting)
I didn't really have him pegged as a corporate kinda guy from the start. I am really suprised that he could take it this long before he left. Corps are often to stifling to creativity.
Slashdot won't like this but... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm sure that the Slash crowd won't like this opinion but it's mine. Flame on.
Re:Anything to do with Waste... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it has everything to do with the lack of independance of coding, not WASTE or any other particular project. Those are just symptoms of the problem.
I've worked for companies before that have draconian contracts, "Anything you think is our property! Hah!"
Yes, it was WASTE (Score:3, Interesting)
I completely support him here...he sees code as a form of expression, and being censored is one of the worst things you can get paid to do.
Besides, I guess we have an answer to the question of whether Nullsoft is a legal entity free from the tentacles of AOL or not
Question about article (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if the GPL license is valid at this point for WASTE? Or did Justin not have the rights to release it under GPL?
He's not resigning as far as I can tell. (Score:1, Interesting)
This is a very misleading story from the AP.
Most Winamp coders left already (Score:5, Interesting)
He wrote his own player instead, which is, eh, quite different from Winamp, Foobar2000 [hydrogenaudio.org].
Anyway, Frankel has little to complain about. Nullsoft was bought out for almost 86M$. For that much money, he'll never have to code, err, express himself ever again.
iTunes for windows anybody??? (Score:5, Interesting)
About time! (Score:3, Interesting)
Not much of a surprise... (Score:5, Interesting)
JUSTIN, GO TO APPLE! (Score:0, Interesting)
Why did this take so long? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)
This was discussed to death in the previous WASTE discussion. Justin, as an employee of AOL, tried to put WASTE under the GPL. AOL then came forward and said that Justin had no authority to do so.
However, just because an employee makes a deal outside of their authority doesn't automatically reverse the deal. The test is whether the other party to the deal in good faith believed that the employee had the authority, or should have known that something was amiss. That's a tough question and would likely take a judge to answer completely...
What did he expect? (Score:2, Interesting)
Mouthing off in his blog doesn't help matters either. Honestly, to me this just displays immaturity. Not a good thing, not a bad thing either. Just stating it as I see it. He's still young, he'll probably eventually mature and realize the world works on different terms than his, and not vice versa. It would be naive and immature otherwise, and naivety and immaturity is what Justin Frankel has displayed in spades the past few weeks. Welcome to the real world, it's called "growing up and accepting responsibility."
Re:Justin Frankel (Score:1, Interesting)
you're free not to work for them. (Score:5, Interesting)
If you take the contract, you shouldn't complain about the conditions later. I don't mean just you, Xerithane, personally, but anyone in general, and him especially. If he really agreed to this kind of contract, he's given AOL the high road in this matter.
Besides that, even if he worked on it completely independently, without Nullsoft resources, and without a contract giving all IP developed during employment to AOL, they're still free to refuse to let it sit on corporate servers, where it generates legal liability and bandwidth costs for them.
Re:queue the llama noises (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah well. (Score:2, Interesting)
It's hard enough to push open source development within a company of any kind when this kind of thing happens. You spend months convincing your boss that the free software community is totally altruistic and then BLAM, this happens and they get scared again. Wonderful.
I had almost persuaded my company to impliment a very large scale GPL application deployment, affecting 10,000 or more desktops - a MAJOR undertaking. All the hoops had been jumped (yes, we will modify GPL code, no we won't distribute our modifications or development code unless it gets cleared through IT, yes we will play nice with the community) and some little shit _steals_ code from his employer and puts it out under the GPL. This is not the bad bit - the bad bit is that the community, insead of helping AOL by respecting their wishes instead just said 'too late, we have it now, sod off' even though it was never intended to be released under the GPL by the legal owner.
Wow, not that surprising then that the edict comes down from on high to freeze the project pending review (this means forever, basically, unless I kill myself with effort once more). Another potential convert lost, who might have followed one GPL app deep into the open source world.
You would scream murder if a company violates the GPL (as would I) - why shouldn't companies extract vengance if the community breaks the same rules, no matter how good they think their reasons are? The end just does not justify the means.
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... (Score:4, Interesting)
Why did he have to release it at nullsoft.com? (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't get his complaining about freedom and oppression and stuff. Why can't he just publish his software on some other web page, maybe even under a pseudonym or something.
Yes, but..... (Score:2, Interesting)
Selling one's company for $86 million certainly does, though. I think he's stayed on this long to continue working on the project he loved...... I don't think it's about the money any more. So does exist the possibility he'll go OSS, or perhaps form another company, cherry-pick his former co-workers at NullSoft and finance the operation out of his pocket. I bet he's waiting to see what the terms of his noncompete mean, and whether they're something he can get around.
Re:you're free not to work for them. (Score:5, Interesting)
Not to sound trite, but I think this is maybe oversimplified. Contracts are compromises, and compromises always leave room for either side to get an advantage over the other. As with many corporations, the power dynamic is such that a contractee may in effect be forced to agree to less than fair provisions because they have become 'standard,' or the job market is tough, or the company is exerting monopoly power, etc. That agreement doesn't make draconian clauses or terms any less draconian, and the "free-market, free choice" ideal shouldn't be an absolute argument when there are such exceptions.
That said, I think it looks like Frankel more or less agrees with you, and that's why he's resigning instead of filing a frivolous lawsuit.
Re:Anything to do with Waste... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't sign contracts like that. My current employer sends a gentle reminder every 6 months that I need to sign that contract, and every 6 months I say, "Not until the work for the company vs. work during personal time issue is corrected". They have not pressed it too hard because many of my co-workers have not signed it either.
Re:Non-compete clauses (Score:3, Interesting)
All that really means is that your current or former company can't prevent you from taking another job regardless of what you've signed, IF your other option would be not working.
This guy released code which was created using Nullsoft resources (brainpower, cpu power, company time) and released it under the name of the company. They have every right to rescind that release. The only real issue here is the GPL question, if it's released under GPL can it be pulled back?
He has a job he's choosing to leave, anything he signed in terms of a non-compete is very valid and in place, as he has a perfectly good job he's choosing to leave.
(ianal, but I have just gone through an ordeal with a non-compete and learned a lot.)
Re:Ah well. (Score:3, Interesting)
Then you're saying "he deserved it"; I'm not aware that he was fired or terminated, all it says is that he's unhappy with the current situation, it sucks and he wants out. If he was fired or terminated then I'm sure instead of saying I want to leave because xyz.. He'd say something more like.. I got canned, fuck it I'm happy now. Lastly, AOL should of made sure that this situation didn't happen, that is why they have lawyers, that is why Mozilla is under a different license; etc etc ad nauseam. Not only that but Frankel has released stuff before causing the same exact type of hysteria and the only thing that happened was that the protocol was reverse engineered and is being used widely in/as p2p applications.
The only thing we know for sure is that Frankel and AOL have never seen eye to eye on what he programs and releases and when he does release it's subject to be unauthorized for whatever reason.
If your company has decided to put things on hold based on this, here a hint. They weren't planning on going through with it anyway. You don't tip toe into a situation affecting 10,000 or more desktops and then decide that because a programmer released a program under Opensource/GPL (which he has done before) that was removed; the project needs to be put on hold pending review. Especially since closed/open-source it doesn't matter. Someone can do the samething right this second at your place of work.
Again, be clear.. The community didn't break any rules. Justin Frankel doesn't speak for the community and no one knows the details of the situation. It's also highly unlikely they'll ever be made public. So how your company and yourself come to your own conclusions is beyond the scope and comprehension of the actual situation, extremely premature and bordering childish.
Frankel vs. JWZ (Score:2, Interesting)
Talented young programmer, burnt out by the system, chucks it all after a few years of corporate slavery to AOL and rides off into the sunset with a lot of cash.
Zawinski left when his options vested, and I'm guessing Frankel has some other contractual or monetary force keeping him there, otherwise he'd be out.
Doesn't bode well for AOL at any rate.
Re:Anything to do with Waste... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:One doesn't have to wonder... (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, though, RSAREF (which WASTE uses) is under a license that is (very) incompatable with the GPL. Nothing stopping you from distributing the source (assuming you don't mind AOL possibly coming after you), but no binaries.
And, oh, my. Just finished reading the last clasues of the RSAREF license. Looks like WASTE violates those, meaning WASTE isn't legal anyway (at least until/unless someone re-writes it w/o RSAREF).
Re:Non-compete clauses (Score:1, Interesting)
I think the point is that he's leaving of his own free will - he could stay and have a job, he's choosing not to do so. If it's hard for him to find a job that doesn't violate the non-compete agreement he signed with AOL, well, he should hafve thought about that before he left the job, right?
In any case, things get distorted because he's a principal for the company (NullSoft, AOL, whatever).
Judges tend to interpret non-competes for us poor peons pretty liberally, becuase we generally don't have any choice in the matter: signing one is usually a condition of employment, often presented after the start of employment, and companies generally do not provide compensation in any way, shape or form for signing the agreement. Principals, OTOH, often get pretty generous packages that include "X months pay" or even "X years pay" upon termination. In those cases, they are obviously getting compensated for the time that they might have to be out of a job because of a non-compete, so judges tend to be more strict in the interpretation of the agreement.
(Disclaimer: IANAL, but what I've said above is what real, live, honest-to-gosh lawyers have told me about how non-compete agreements are generally viewed and dealt with by courts in the state of PA).
Re:Assignment of copyright and the GPL (Score:4, Interesting)
The janitor couldn't release this software. Well, he could, but it's unlikely that a reasonable person would think that a janitor could speak for a company. Not so the CEO. Similarly, Justin is not CEO at AOL, so could not change pricing there. However, whoever replaced Steve Case could do something like that.
The car salesman probably couldn't give away fifty free cars. The owner could. Further, if there was a sales manager, he could probably give away the cars.
Re:you're free not to work for them. (Score:2, Interesting)
I agree with you, an invididual vs. a corporation is almost always a losing proposition and "regular" employees get rufu'ed all the time. However, I have no pity for anyone who sells their company to AOL and then has a pity party on the Net because he's not being allowed to "express" himself. Screw him. There's a truckload of good programmers in this country who just want to be able to go to work, but can't because American companies would rather use cheap labor from the "world pool". And over here we have poor little Justin Frankel, sitting on a bunch of cash and stock options from selling Nullsoft, and you want ME to feel sorry for him? In a pig's eye. Tell the little maricon to grow up.
In Frankel's Defense (Score:5, Interesting)
You say that, of him, that "yamering on in public about [his] former employer is at best pretty immature." While this is true, he isn't guilty of this particular thing (at least in the links that slashdot provided; i would welcome others if you have them). In fact, he says (of AOLTW), "I have nothing but respect for the company". All he claims is that the company owns his code, and it seem to me that you agree with that statement.
If there was financial timing involved, its possible that he came to his conclusion about leaving a while ago (perhaps after gnutella got ganked), and just postponed his departure until after he was financially secure. This too, to me, is totally valid; its a lot easier to practice your art (whatever that may be) if you don't have to worry about money. Four years of compromise might mean, for Frankel, a lifetime of doing just what he's wanted.
Which brings us to WASTE. First of all, I need to plead ignorance here; perhaps you can explain to me why Mozilla folk can release GPL code while still working for AOLTW, and Frankel can't. Is it a difference in their contracts? If so, do you have access to their contracts to show me the differences? But alas, I promised to assume that your factual information is accurate. So, he did something wrong and illegal by claiming to release GPLed code under Nullsoft. However, I'd like to think that this is another part of self-expression, perhaps similar to graffiti (which, although it is wrong, and ought to be wrong, is still sometimes beautiful/powerful art, and a real form of self expression). Sometimes, the method of communicating your art (in his case, as his last act of working for Nullsoft) is as important as the art itself. It sounds illogical, and grounded more in romantic ideals than in fact, but I can imagine that being important to Frankel.
Thanks for your comment, and please respond or email me if I've misrepresented your opinion in any way.
Re:In Frankel's Defense (Score:3, Interesting)
The big difference between the GPL and the Mozilla Public License: Any patches, features, and whatnot that the Mozilla project accepts have their copyright transferred to the Mozilla project. This leaves them the option of closing future releases (though they cannot take back rights granted to the code already out there.
With the regular ol' GPL, once you've incorporated someone else's code into your project, you have to get their permission to license it under other terms. With a huge project with thousands of contributors, this is no small feat.
That is how AOL is able to release Netscape without releasing the applicable source code. I wonder what would have happened if WASTE had been MPL'ed instead.