[wtopace]

I have been receiving a lot of PMs requesting for me to share the PathPilot software with others. Since Tormach has specifically stated that they are ONLY providing software to Tormach mill owners at this time, I respect that and don't plan to share any ISOs, files, scripts, configuration files, or discs with anyone for any reason. Thank you for also respecting Tormach's decision. Unfortunately, this holds for your uncle's 1-of-a-kind router, as well as your second cousin's robotic foot and your son's 32 axis CNC human companion that cooks, cleans and even lets him win at video games.

At the end of the day, PathPilot is nothing more than a glorified LinuxCNC install with some pre-configuration specific to the Tormach machines (and of course some of their wizards for the lathe and mill, which hopefully the contribute back to the upstream at some point). I would highly recommend anyone interested in a Mach3 alternative give LinuxCNC a try, I'll include a link at the bottom for anyone interested.

I really wanted to post this in the most compassionate way possible and try to not offend anyone in the community, but please stop asking people to share others' work (PathPilot). There is a chance Tormach might decide to share their hard work with everyone, or at least contribute back the generic parts to the LCNC community, but until then, I'm not in any position to make that decision for them.

Linux CNC: LinuxCNC.org (Because what's cooler than Tux holding an end mill???)

[phoneman]

Thanks for the update.
I have been investigating Linux and LinusCNC. It would sure help if I was a rocket scientist. So far it is very confusing how to change a computer from PC to Linux and then get LinuxCNC to run. I have looked at several screen shots of LinuxCNC and I have to say I like the screen layout that we see in Path Pilot better. I did find info on building screens but again it was very confusing.
If I can figure all of this out do you see any problem with designing my own set of screens that have the look and feel of Path Pilot screens only, Not using any of there source code.

Dave

[MichaelHenry]

Didn't Tormach pay for the trajectory planner update, which was given to the community? If so, it seems fair that they should be credited for that contribution.

Mike

[wtopace]

Thanks for the update.
I have been investigating Linux and LinusCNC. It would sure help if I was a rocket scientist. So far it is very confusing how to change a computer from PC to Linux and then get LinuxCNC to run. I have looked at several screen shots of LinuxCNC and I have to say I like the screen layout that we see in Path Pilot better. I did find info on building screens but again it was very confusing.
If I can figure all of this out do you see any problem with designing my own set of screens that have the look and feel of Path Pilot screens only, Not using any of there source code.

Dave

I'm not sure what OS most rocket scientists run ;-) I would say if you create your own screenset, even if it looks similar to Tormach, that it would be 100% legal and perfectly fine. I'm sure you'll find things you want to change while working on it though.

Didn't Tormach pay for the trajectory planner update, which was given to the community? If so, it seems fair that they should be credited for that contribution.

Mike

Yes, I do remember hearing during the webinar that Tormach paid for the new trajectory planner, which is a huge deal. It seems like most people here are wanting their UI layouts and wizards though.

[MichaelHenry]

Thanks for that "Admin" info by the way - much appreciated!

[lovely2]

I have been receiving a lot of PMs requesting for me to share the PathPilot software with others. Since Tormach has specifically stated that they are ONLY providing software to Tormach mill owners at this time, I respect that and don't plan to share any ISOs, files, scripts, configuration files, or discs with anyone for any reason. Thank you for also respecting Tormach's decision. Unfortunately, this holds for your uncle's 1-of-a-kind router, as well as your second cousin's robotic foot and your son's 32 axis CNC human companion that cooks, cleans and even lets him win at video games.

I really wanted to post this in the most compassionate way possible and try to not offend anyone in the community, but please stop asking people to share others' work (PathPilot). There is a chance Tormach might decide to share their hard work with everyone, or at least contribute back the generic parts to the LCNC community, but until then, I'm not in any position to make that decision for them.

While I respect your right not to share "ISOs, files, scripts, configuration files, or discs". I would like to inform the community that PathPilot is a derivative work of LinuxCNC which is clearly licensed under GPL v2.0. The GPL v2.0 clearly states that you have considerable rights, one of which is to share the PathPilot files that you have in your possession. (Other rights include the right to request and receive the source code that was used to make your PathPilot files).

The notion that you sharing Tormach's work is immoral is incorrect.

The GPL was created in the belief that software that was shared benefited everybody. "The idea that the proprietary software social system—the system that says you are not allowed to share or change software—is antisocial, that it is unethical, that it is simply wrong, may come as a surprise to some readers. But what else could we say about a system based on dividing the public and keeping users helpless? " (please read: About the GNU Project - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation for the philosophical background that underpins the creation of the GPL)

You may not agree with the philosophy of GPL but that doesn't matter because Tormach has accepted the GPL, created a derivative of Linux CNC which is "other peoples work". Most open source contributors would find it slightly hypocritical that Tormach isn't publicly sharing PathPilot but they have that right under the GPL.

Say you designed a brilliant jig/tool and shared the designs for it creation because you know it would benefit lots of your peers however you put a license on it that said if you create a derivative work that the new designs had to be as well shared. However Massive Industry Tooling and Jigs Co saw your design had a great idea to make it better and started selling it. How would you feel? a little taken advantage of? (Not an ideal example, but should give you the concept)

It is only a matter of time before the cat is out the bag. As soon a binary is in the public domain, the public have the right to request and receive a copy of the source that was used to create the binary.
Even the powerful Sony Entertainment Group released the source code when a version of the PlayStationPortable gcc/binutils compiler was *legally* released in the public domain.

So even if you don't share it, somebody will one day soon. And personally I believe that the actions of that person will benefit everybody that uses/sells/develops LinuxCNC/PathPilot, even Tormach.

[wtopace]

While I respect your right not to share "ISOs, files, scripts, configuration files, or discs". I would like to inform the community that PathPilot is a derivative work of LinuxCNC which is clearly licensed under GPL v2.0. The GPL v2.0 clearly states that you have considerable rights, one of which is to share the PathPilot files that you have in your possession. (Other rights include the right to request and receive the source code that was used to make your PathPilot files).

The notion that you sharing Tormach's work is immoral is incorrect.

The GPL was created in the belief that software that was shared benefited everybody. "The idea that the proprietary software social system—the system that says you are not allowed to share or change software—is antisocial, that it is unethical, that it is simply wrong, may come as a surprise to some readers. But what else could we say about a system based on dividing the public and keeping users helpless? " (please read: About the GNU Project - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation for the philosophical background that underpins the creation of the GPL)

You may not agree with the philosophy of GPL but that doesn't matter because Tormach has accepted the GPL, created a derivative of Linux CNC which is "other peoples work". Most open source contributors would find it slightly hypocritical that Tormach isn't publicly sharing PathPilot but they have that right under the GPL.

Say you designed a brilliant jig/tool and shared the designs for it creation because you know it would benefit lots of your peers however you put a license on it that said if you create a derivative work that the new designs had to be as well shared. However Massive Industry Tooling and Jigs Co saw your design had a great idea to make it better and started selling it. How would you feel? a little taken advantage of? (Not an ideal example, but should give you the concept)

It is only a matter of time before the cat is out the bag. As soon a binary is in the public domain, the public have the right to request and receive a copy of the source that was used to create the binary.
Even the powerful Sony Entertainment Group released the source code when a version of the PlayStationPortable gcc/binutils compiler was *legally* released in the public domain.

So even if you don't share it, somebody will one day soon. And personally I believe that the actions of that person will benefit everybody that uses/sells/develops LinuxCNC/PathPilot, even Tormach.

Thanks for your concerns. As a sw engineer (machining is a side hobby / small business for me), I completely agree. I have worked on projects that could not be open sourced, and therefore I have had to fore go using amazing open source libraries due to licensing. I have also been on the flip side and contributed to open source projects and I love the concepts.

I will say that I, personally, have absolutely no responsibility to send anything to anyone, regardless of the license model Tormach's software is bound to.

As for the notion that sharing Tormach's work is immoral, that is a tough call. If Tormach believes that they are legally allowed to keep their software proprietary and closed-source, then that's their deal. There have been lots of software license cases where the GPL/LGPL license has failed due to semantics regarding extending / linking / incorporating / deriving / etc... I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not going to try to make that call or even care to investigate it on my own. Until Tormach agrees to release their code, or is forced to in a court system, I DO feel that it is immoral to release what they have marked, incorrectly, as proprietary information (although, I hope it never escalates to this level).

Tormach already has the (very) standard disclaimer that source code can be requested by writing, so why not try to write to them and get it yourself?

I'm still mind-blown that people want PathPilot so much. The tormach_mill and tormach_lathe configuration file aren't going to help much unless you are running Tormach's mesa card configuration and control board. If it's just a flex-my-muscle and force Tormach to do something move, then fine, hire a software license lawyer and sue them. If not, just install LCNC and rename your host "PathPilot", you can even update your UI configuration to rename it "PathPilot" if it helps you sleep at night.

All things aside, my personal opinion is that Tormach should open source their stuff. If nothing else, people like me would contribute pull requests to their Tormach specific components of LCNC (for example, I run a non-standard waterproof keyboard and the trackpad doesn't work properly with their backplot viewer UI configuration). They also avoid a potentially costly legal battle.

Most importantly, they gain the respect from the community and aren't put on a wall-of-shame list like ffmpeg has.

At the end of the day, you and I agree... the license is the license and they made their choice on day 1. I guess we just have different ideas on how it should happen, as I don't care to try to strong-arm anyone or force anything. I'm not going to feed the trolls anymore, so this is my last post regarding PathPilot licensing legality.

[tmarks11]

Most importantly, they gain the respect from the community and aren't put on a wall-of-shame list like ffmpeg has.

Since Tormach worked closely with leaders in the LinuxCNC community when developing the PP variant, funded programmers to make improvements in the LinuxCNC source code (which was then incorporated in PP), I don't understand why any more is required. Sounds like they already have the respect of the people who matter, and their interpretation of their license is acceptable to the LinuxCNC group.

I have seen not a single flame war about Tormach PP on the linuxcnc.org forum, which means either people understand and respect with Tormach has done, or the moderators are keeping a tight lid on things.

[phoneman]

The thing to remember is that Path Pilot is just a GUI or screen set in LinuxCNC , just as Axis and gmoccapy are also screen sets in LinuxCNC. So the question is does Tormach own the PP screen set or is it just part of LinuxCNC that anyone that knows there way through configuring LinuxCNC can configure to fit there non Tormach machine.

Dave

[lovely2]

I realise, since I have very few/zero posts. I might seem like a troll but I'm not. As a software engineer, and advocate of the GPL and open-source software I felt the need to clear up any miss-understandings such as the comment "that it is immoral to share Tormach's work" because it way more complex than that when dealing with the GPL. I know parts of PathPilot won't be covered by the GPL, and thus just sharing the ISO/CD would be illegal.

PS if people think i'm being to flamey/combative, let me know and i'll leave this thread alone.

At the end of the day, you and I agree... the license is the license and they made their choice on day 1. I guess we just have different ideas on how it should happen, as I don't care to try to strong-arm anyone or force anything. I'm not going to feed the trolls anymore, so this is my last post regarding PathPilot licensing legality. There have been lots of software license cases where the GPL/LGPL license has failed due to semantics regarding extending / linking / incorporating / deriving / etc...

We do agree and I have no intention of forcing or strong arming anybody, I've just seen the way this usually goes many times before.
On the subject of the LGPL, it is very different to the GPL and since LinuxCNC isn't LGPL mentioning it just brings up more confusion. There are no exceptions in the GPL for extending/linking/incorporating/deriving, this is in fact the reason for LGPL. The GPL is a viral license and you have to be pretty carefully around its infectious nature.

Since Tormach worked closely with leaders in the LinuxCNC community when developing the PP variant, funded programmers to make improvements in the LinuxCNC source code (which was then incorporated in PP), I don't understand why any more is required. Sounds like they already have the respect of the people who matter, and their interpretation of their license is acceptable to the LinuxCNC group.

What the leaders/current contributors think/want/interpret has no bearing on the license. Otherwise any opensource project could be branched, a new set of patsy leaders found and the license ignored.
To avoid the GPL LinuxCNC would need to be re-licensed and to be re-license the consent of EVERY contributor is required, or to remove offending modules/parts.
To avoid this problem I've seen cleverly co-licensed open-source projects GPL/Artistic, but this was always done at start.

The thing to remember is that Path Pilot is just a GUI or screen set in LinuxCNC , just as Axis and gmoccapy are also screen sets in LinuxCNC. So the question is does Tormach own the PP screen set or is it just part of LinuxCNC that anyone that knows there way through configuring LinuxCNC can configure to fit there non Tormach machine.

It just depends on how the screen set is implemented. If they are just configuration files then they have the copyright and the right to license them however they see fit. However if they have modified code, imported/linked parts of LinuxCNC or even used a LinuxCNC sample screen set config as the basis to make their PathPilot screen sets then the PathPilot screen set will most likely be covered by the GPL.

[phoneman]

It just depends on how the screen set is implemented. If they are just configuration files then they have the copyright and the right to license them however they see fit. However if they have modified code, imported/linked parts of LinuxCNC or even used a LinuxCNC sample screen set config as the basis to make their PathPilot screen sets then the PathPilot screen set will most likely be covered by the GPL.[/QUOTE]


How would one go about finding out which is the case here. I do not know enough about Linux and LinuxCNC to be able to determine this.

Dave

[tmarks11]

How would one go about finding out which is the case here. I do not know enough about Linux and LinuxCNC to be able to determine this.

You would probably go about this by asking some of the programmers from the LinuxCNC community that participated in the development and blessed Tormach's interpretation of the GPL.

Messages about installing and using EMC

Rob E. wrote the new trajectory planner, and has been diligently fixing bugs as they crop up. I learned today that he's funded by Tormach to do this work....Well, the new trajectory planner is huge. And it was done quietly, without Tormach publicly taking credit for it, which has left people not realizing the contribution Tormach has made...
...Tormach has displayed good will towards individual members of our community, and towards the community as a whole, and i hope and believe they will continue to do so by following the spirit of the community as well as the letter of the law.

[vmax549]

The way I read the GPL is it depends on HOW Tormach linked their GUI to the Lcnc core. One way allows Tormach to avoid giving away the GUI with the Lcnc source code. The OTHER way forces Tormach to Give it and the source code as a combined work.

There is a HUGE advantage to being able to use the Path Pilot as the base to a 4th axis cnc machine(mill or Router). Everything is already PRE defined all you have to do is match there pinout configuration and away you go. Having MESA on board is another huge advantage.

I have asked GREG to please consider releasing the Path Pilot to the DIY group as a NO SUPPORT OPTION (The DIYers can set up their OWN support website and network) but no luck so far(;-)

(;-) TP

[daniellyall]

they are more than likely waiting for Linux cnc to catch up once its the same with a different screen they will do it then maybe may be not