I don't want to discuss the morality of this law, but I don't think it's a decent action from Sourceforge.
Sourceforge community has no frontier since an open source project has no frontier by its nature.
Nor Sourceforge neither US government does own the hosted open source projects. By applying this law, it censors the resources which belong to everybody from some population; therefore it betrays the trust of whole community.
Has Sourceforge really no choice? Do the hosted open source projects deserve it?
Any alternative solution is welcome.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The few large scale options out there that are not restricted use version controls that are not SVN: Launchpad is Bazaar, GitHub is Git.
There seems to be KnowledgeForge http://knowledgeforge.net/ That could do it. It runs on the KForge engine, which apparently you can use to start your own hosting site: http://www.kforgeproject.com/. But if we're going to go on by ourselves, why not move to a TRAC-based site: http://trac.edgewall.org/? It has all the facilities of SourceForge and then some.
So, Alternatives are out there, but there doesn't seem to be any easy options for us to migrate to in order to avoid this ban.
joce.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
With 'alternative solution' you consider leaving SFN and moving somewhere else?
It could be an option.
However, the key solution is in sourceforge's hand : they could make some of their servers outside of USA, so the content on these servers will not be applied by USA's law.
Don
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
True. And I believe most of them are in USA, so USA government can always force them to apply this law.
The radical solution is to find a quality host open source service in a neutral country.
Another solution is to set up the services such source version control, forums, File release system, etc in a machine located in a neutral country (with KForge?). But it costs.
Don
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
KForge, TRAC, whatever.
The trick would be to offset the costs with ads.
If you generate enough traffic on the site, you could even be making money.
How do you think SF does it?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Basically, we don't need all the facilities to go. We just need a mirror located in a proper place, and some way to advertise it.
While the apparent lack of vision of SF is embarrassing, even shocking, setting up something as extensive is a challenge, and it won't pop up overnight. Perhaps if the whole open software community works on it…it still won't pop up overnight.
CChris
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Really, what can they do? Do you expect SF to break US laws, especially laws that might fall under anti-terrorist legislation? It's probably not fixable as simple as "setting up servers in another country", server infrastructure and all considered. Doesn't really matter whether the projects hosted on SF are "American" or not, making them available (and hosting forums etc) probably counts just fine as "offering a service to axis of evil"…
Yes, this censoring is pretty lousy and unfortunate, but blame the US government (and the US population that voted it in), not SourceForge.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Yes, this censoring is pretty lousy and unfortunate, but blame the US government (and the US population that voted it in), not SourceForge.
That's too easy. It's always the same "it's not my fault". That's what I see when I read the above. Not good enough. SF has a choice and chooses to fold to the US government in this case (user's accessing the site). Meanwhile, they don't censor Vuze/Azureus or any other BitTorrent client, which are still hosted on SF. These are in violation of US law given the many cases RIAA has "won" over the years in court.
I am sure a hunt through software on SF would find at least a handful of projects that violate DMCA. That is entirely against the rules of SF's land, and yet they still host the software. In the US it is illegal for a child under the age of 13 to sign-up to a site without express written permission from their parents. What controls on SF stop that from happening? None that I've seen.
In this case they chose to obey the rules and censor, but in other cases they look the other way. SF could easily fix this by ignoring these rules as it does others. If SF wants to remain a place to "find and develop open" software then they need to move to a place where open continues to mean uncensored.
Here's an idea, move the servers to Canada and incorporate in he Bahamas. Suddenly they are not a US company any more. Instead, they would be an international company, which offices in the US and not subject to the censoring they are complying with.
Oh, but why bother? It's not their fault.
Bob
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
SourceForge has a choice, indeed: comply with the law, or risk being dragged to court. You can't compare this with torrent clients, as torrent clients aren't inherently illegal (illegal use might be in the 99% range, but that doesn't make the technology illegal). As for other projects, you can't expect the SF team to know details about every hosted project, and it's probably just fine to wait for (and comply with) DMCA takedown notices. IANAL, though.
In the US it is illegal for a child under the age of 13 to sign-up to a site without express written permission from their parents. What controls on SF stop that from happening? None that I've seen.
SF signup has a "I am at least 18 years old or have consent from my Parent or Guardian" checkbox.
Don't get me wrong, I don't approve of the censoring, but again: SF isn't to blame. They have to abide by the laws of the country they reside in.
Here's an idea, move the servers to Canada and incorporate in he Bahamas. Suddenly they are not a US company any more. Instead, they would be an international company, which offices in the US and not subject to the censoring they are complying with.
…And that's something SF should probably consider for the long term - but that kind of change isn't something that you can do overnight. It's pretty easy for you to say that SF are handling things horribly wrong, but you're not the one putting your ass on the line.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Github: best unless you accept command line tools. I don't know who, among PuTTY/Pageant or TortoiesGit, is not playing nice, but I've never able to use this. From the docs, Git sure is beter than SVN.
About SF: those laws weren't passed 3 months ago, they are nothing new. Had it been the case, SF would have been caught flat-foted and their best plan would probably be to do as they do, as people targeted by the ban can quite easily circumvent it. What puzzles me is that they would have been caught by surprise by laws passed years ago. This is where the vision may have been lacking.
As for the technical/legal advice posted earlier, I'm not in the U.S. and cannot comment on it. However, it could be too late to implement it, as they might be seen as attempts to squirt the law. Independent mirroring seems to be the best we can do. Any ideas welcome.
CChris
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
My opinion is: it was planned actually. No reason for that to happen randomly. In fact there is no /dev/urandom in real world.
Blogged this here: http://web31337.org/pwned-by-usa.html
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I sent a mail to Ross Turk (ex-director of Sourceforge Community) about this issue, he has forwarded the mail to one of his ex-colleagues in geek.net (the parent company of SourceForge). It seems that SF are trying to walk around this problem.
In the meantime, we are looking for a place to host Notepad++ binaries and source release (in the case that there is no solution from SF). The server must be outside of US, and free to use. If you have any idea or offer, please let me know.
Don
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The fact that you are willing to spend the time needed and inconvenience to move the project (if it comes to that) shows that you are a man of principle.
P.S.: Each and every US citizen should feel the burden of responsibility for their government's actions towards a "controlled" future.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Don
I sincerely hope SF will consider the relocating solution. SourceForge for me is rather a symbol of Open Source Community than just an American company.
You mean it was? It was for me, until they've changed design to current, previous ones were good, don't you find? I agree some new tools arrived but it still kills my eyes. It's too colorful in some places. My proposals about that ( http://stat.web31337.org/etc/sf/new_sf.png (yeah I still keep it for ones staffers who remember that) ) were kindly ignored. Still there are some bugs in Opera 9.64 under both linux and windows. And still it's uncomfortable.
After this disaster I've decided to completely get all my project release files away from here. What's most interesting: I couldn't remove my own projects. Weird.
I really remember seeing Notepad++ often on the top of downloads and popularity around here and I can understand what you must be feeling about moving to other location which might not be as comfortable. But there is also a place like 127.0.0.1, don't forget about that. I suggest you buy an "org" domain name for a project. It is pity your project is BOUND to sourceforge domains.
Opensource must be open.
Go for it, Don, I believe you'll find a perfect solution!
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
You can always ask SF support to remove your own projects. File a ticket with the support, they get those by the day, and processing is usually fast, except for projects with several admins.
CChris
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
donho - I'm the admin of another "top 20" project here on sourceforge, and in a similar position. Finding a home outside the US is looking tricky. If you find somewhere that can cope with large, high-volume projects, please let me know.
Meanwhile, the best suggestion we've had is to beg for donations and rent a 1U server somewhere…. :-(
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Chris just sent me this link:
clarifying-sourceforgenets-denial-of-site-access-for-certain-persons-in-accordance-with-us-law
I don't want to discuss the morality of this law, but I don't think it's a decent action from Sourceforge.
Sourceforge community has no frontier since an open source project has no frontier by its nature.
Nor Sourceforge neither US government does own the hosted open source projects. By applying this law, it censors the resources which belong to everybody from some population; therefore it betrays the trust of whole community.
Has Sourceforge really no choice? Do the hosted open source projects deserve it?
Any alternative solution is welcome.
Unbelievable!!!
With 'alternative solution' you consider leaving SFN and moving somewhere else?
Sadly, there doesn't appear to have tons of alternatives:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities
The few large scale options out there that are not restricted use version controls that are not SVN: Launchpad is Bazaar, GitHub is Git.
There seems to be KnowledgeForge http://knowledgeforge.net/ That could do it. It runs on the KForge engine, which apparently you can use to start your own hosting site: http://www.kforgeproject.com/. But if we're going to go on by ourselves, why not move to a TRAC-based site: http://trac.edgewall.org/? It has all the facilities of SourceForge and then some.
So, Alternatives are out there, but there doesn't seem to be any easy options for us to migrate to in order to avoid this ban.
joce.
an old news already. DO not guess the reason.
there is no relationship with open source.
It could be an option.
However, the key solution is in sourceforge's hand : they could make some of their servers outside of USA, so the content on these servers will not be applied by USA's law.
Don
Thank you Joce for these info.
True. And I believe most of them are in USA, so USA government can always force them to apply this law.
The radical solution is to find a quality host open source service in a neutral country.
Another solution is to set up the services such source version control, forums, File release system, etc in a machine located in a neutral country (with KForge?). But it costs.
Don
KForge, TRAC, whatever.
The trick would be to offset the costs with ads.
If you generate enough traffic on the site, you could even be making money.
How do you think SF does it?
Basically, we don't need all the facilities to go. We just need a mirror located in a proper place, and some way to advertise it.
While the apparent lack of vision of SF is embarrassing, even shocking, setting up something as extensive is a challenge, and it won't pop up overnight. Perhaps if the whole open software community works on it…it still won't pop up overnight.
CChris
Lack of visions, embarrassing, shocking?
Really, what can they do? Do you expect SF to break US laws, especially laws that might fall under anti-terrorist legislation? It's probably not fixable as simple as "setting up servers in another country", server infrastructure and all considered. Doesn't really matter whether the projects hosted on SF are "American" or not, making them available (and hosting forums etc) probably counts just fine as "offering a service to axis of evil"…
Yes, this censoring is pretty lousy and unfortunate, but blame the US government (and the US population that voted it in), not SourceForge.
That's too easy. It's always the same "it's not my fault". That's what I see when I read the above. Not good enough. SF has a choice and chooses to fold to the US government in this case (user's accessing the site). Meanwhile, they don't censor Vuze/Azureus or any other BitTorrent client, which are still hosted on SF. These are in violation of US law given the many cases RIAA has "won" over the years in court.
I am sure a hunt through software on SF would find at least a handful of projects that violate DMCA. That is entirely against the rules of SF's land, and yet they still host the software. In the US it is illegal for a child under the age of 13 to sign-up to a site without express written permission from their parents. What controls on SF stop that from happening? None that I've seen.
In this case they chose to obey the rules and censor, but in other cases they look the other way. SF could easily fix this by ignoring these rules as it does others. If SF wants to remain a place to "find and develop open" software then they need to move to a place where open continues to mean uncensored.
Here's an idea, move the servers to Canada and incorporate in he Bahamas. Suddenly they are not a US company any more. Instead, they would be an international company, which offices in the US and not subject to the censoring they are complying with.
Oh, but why bother? It's not their fault.
Bob
SourceForge has a choice, indeed: comply with the law, or risk being dragged to court. You can't compare this with torrent clients, as torrent clients aren't inherently illegal (illegal use might be in the 99% range, but that doesn't make the technology illegal). As for other projects, you can't expect the SF team to know details about every hosted project, and it's probably just fine to wait for (and comply with) DMCA takedown notices. IANAL, though.
SF signup has a "I am at least 18 years old or have consent from my Parent or Guardian" checkbox.
Don't get me wrong, I don't approve of the censoring, but again: SF isn't to blame. They have to abide by the laws of the country they reside in.
…And that's something SF should probably consider for the long term - but that kind of change isn't something that you can do overnight. It's pretty easy for you to say that SF are handling things horribly wrong, but you're not the one putting your ass on the line.
Actually, I said:
This is what I don't agree with. Their picking and choosing which laws to follow.
www.GITHUB.com - best
Github: best unless you accept command line tools. I don't know who, among PuTTY/Pageant or TortoiesGit, is not playing nice, but I've never able to use this. From the docs, Git sure is beter than SVN.
About SF: those laws weren't passed 3 months ago, they are nothing new. Had it been the case, SF would have been caught flat-foted and their best plan would probably be to do as they do, as people targeted by the ban can quite easily circumvent it. What puzzles me is that they would have been caught by surprise by laws passed years ago. This is where the vision may have been lacking.
As for the technical/legal advice posted earlier, I'm not in the U.S. and cannot comment on it. However, it could be too late to implement it, as they might be seen as attempts to squirt the law. Independent mirroring seems to be the best we can do. Any ideas welcome.
CChris
donho there is no place like 127.0.0.1
GeoIP reports: 207.97.227.239 - US (United States) San Antonio, Lt 29.5072 Ln -98.5748
My opinion is: it was planned actually. No reason for that to happen randomly. In fact there is no /dev/urandom in real world.
Blogged this here: http://web31337.org/pwned-by-usa.html
I sent a mail to Ross Turk (ex-director of Sourceforge Community) about this issue, he has forwarded the mail to one of his ex-colleagues in geek.net (the parent company of SourceForge). It seems that SF are trying to walk around this problem.
In the meantime, we are looking for a place to host Notepad++ binaries and source release (in the case that there is no solution from SF). The server must be outside of US, and free to use. If you have any idea or offer, please let me know.
Don
FYI:
http://sourceforge.net/blog/clarifying-sourceforgenets-denial-of-site-access-for-certain-persons-in-accordance-with-us-law/comment-page-4/#comment-3016
Don
Donho, you are awesome.
The fact that you are willing to spend the time needed and inconvenience to move the project (if it comes to that) shows that you are a man of principle.
P.S.: Each and every US citizen should feel the burden of responsibility for their government's actions towards a "controlled" future.
Seems like they are rolling it back, partially ( https://sourceforge.net/blog/some-good-news-sourceforge-removes-blanket-blocking/ ).
But the way it's done and the way initial blocking was done only point me to "Prepare for unforeseen consequences." (C) G-Man, Half-Life 2 Episode 2.
Really, Don, there is no reason to stay. I personally won't get back here anyways.
"SourceForge. You can never be sure."
Konstantin, I'm afraid you are right :(
http://sourceforge.net/blog/some-good-news-sourceforge-removes-blanket-blocking/comment-page-2/#comment-3104
Don
You mean it was? It was for me, until they've changed design to current, previous ones were good, don't you find? I agree some new tools arrived but it still kills my eyes. It's too colorful in some places. My proposals about that ( http://stat.web31337.org/etc/sf/new_sf.png (yeah I still keep it for ones staffers who remember that) ) were kindly ignored. Still there are some bugs in Opera 9.64 under both linux and windows. And still it's uncomfortable.
After this disaster I've decided to completely get all my project release files away from here. What's most interesting: I couldn't remove my own projects. Weird.
I really remember seeing Notepad++ often on the top of downloads and popularity around here and I can understand what you must be feeling about moving to other location which might not be as comfortable. But there is also a place like 127.0.0.1, don't forget about that. I suggest you buy an "org" domain name for a project. It is pity your project is BOUND to sourceforge domains.
Opensource must be open.
Go for it, Don, I believe you'll find a perfect solution!
You can always ask SF support to remove your own projects. File a ticket with the support, they get those by the day, and processing is usually fast, except for projects with several admins.
CChris
donho - I'm the admin of another "top 20" project here on sourceforge, and in a similar position. Finding a home outside the US is looking tricky. If you find somewhere that can cope with large, high-volume projects, please let me know.
Meanwhile, the best suggestion we've had is to beg for donations and rent a 1U server somewhere…. :-(