Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Businesses Open Source Software

Trying To Lure Suckers, Company Resells Open Source Blender 294

Posted by timothy
from the born-every-minute dept.
sylphsama writes "A company named 'IllusionMage" deceptively resells a 3D open source animation package (Blender) and claims it as their own. The software, dubbed IllusionMage, portrays flagrant similarities with Blender, although outdated compared to the original. The website itself is a patchwork of sorts, using renders from different users and numerous other packages as a way to impress its visitors. Not only is that a breach of copyright, but they intentionally hide that the software is distributed under the GNU GPL license, rendering it free to use. The Blender Foundation itself has spoken out through its chairman Ton Roosendaal." I love that they promise "Free Updates For Life. All From the Thriving Open Source Community, This Software is Forever Improving."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trying To Lure Suckers, Company Resells Open Source Blender

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Legit (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Darkness404 (1287218) on Tuesday February 22, 2011 @08:40PM (#35286032)
    No, what they are doing is not legal. They are taking non-free images and using it on their own site while claiming it is their own. There's nothing wrong with someone taking Blender, remaking it, licensing it under the GPL and creating a website and selling it. But that isn't what these people are doing, they are trying to deceive others and not crediting the images they use to promote their product.
  • Re:Hide what? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by StikyPad (445176) on Tuesday February 22, 2011 @09:03PM (#35286212) Homepage

    While the site and sales pitch are sleazy, it appears what you're really paying for are the video tutorials which, unless I'm mistaken, were produced by the guy running the site.

    TBH, it looks more like someone's trying to drum up faux controversy to get their site linked from the front page of Slashdot.

  • Re:Legit (Score:2, Insightful)

    by im_thatoneguy (819432) on Tuesday February 22, 2011 @09:19PM (#35286322)

    I thought artists didn't deserve copyrights anymore and lived on a "failed business model".

    Always hard to always stay up to date on the current common wisdom of Slashdot.

  • Re:Legit (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rtfa-troll (1340807) on Wednesday February 23, 2011 @03:36AM (#35288130)
    What you need to do is to send him a C&D and then a serious lawsuit. If you don't have funding then please announce that and we will provide. I now pledge 100 Euro on actual instigation of a court action against him for a specific GPL violation if you need it and provided that you demand appropriate damages (as with the BusyBox cases).

"What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out, which is the exact opposite." -- Bertrand Russell, _Sceptical_Essays_, 1928