Plagiarism?

[gaux]

http://www.cubedesktop.com/index.php
http://www.cubedesktop.com/features.php

All features as in compiz fusion. Why?

[s0l1dsnak3123]

typical ... :(

[Fyda]

My tentative answer to your question of "why" is as follows: because there may be a demand for such features among all computer users (across all platforms).

Who created that demand? I don't think anyone can say, with any certainty, whether it was Compiz or something else that popularised "desktops on a cube" or "fancy desktop effects". In fact, when the subject of "stealing ideas" came up in previous discussions, some people were quick to point out (with evidence) that Compiz itself is not original.

Multiple desktops/viewports/workspaces are not original. The faux-"3D" presentation of windows is not original. Scale and Shift Switcher are clear examples of idea-borrowing in Compiz plugins. Why aren't those as quickly denounced as "plagiarism"?

Well, I suppose it has to do with the fact that Compiz is free, and it's for GNU/Linux, which is also free. Contrast this with apps like Stardock Object Desktop and the "Cube Desktop" app which the OP linked to, which are not free. Yes, there is a sense of injustice arising from the fact that a commercial derivative/clone of a free project could make a profit from doing essentially the same thing. But I think it may be more complex; to what extent does Compiz "own" these ideas? To what extent are they in the public domain? How patentable are they? Should "defensive" patents be filed, and if so, what would be the justification?

Also, how does a free, open-source project patent things without going against the spirit of FOSS? This seems tricky to me.

Overall, the issue doesn't seem as simple as firing accusations of plagiarism. If you can prove that they actually stole code, on the other hand...

[adamk]

Overall, the issue doesn't seem as simple as firing accusations of plagiarism. If you can prove that they actually stole code, on the other hand...

Isn't nearly all the core code under the MIT/X11 license? That makes it kind of hard to steal (though not necessarily impossible) :-)

Adam

[Deciare]

Different developers are allowed to have the same ideas, and different users are allowed to desire the same features. As long as Compiz does it all better, there is no problem. :D

My original post was going to end here, but after seeing Fyda's discourse, I felt obliged to say something more intelligent. :p

So I'd like to add that it's perfectly legitimate to want the features offered by Compiz without actually wanting to use Compiz. There are many reasons why Compiz may not be a good choice. Having an incompatible operating system or hardware is an obvious obstacle. Compiz may have no substitute for an important feature already offered by what you were using before--former users of Beryl and KWin are familiar with this problem. ;) Maybe you don't want to install extra dependencies just to make Compiz run. Maybe you don't like the attitudes of the people involved with the project. Maybe the colour blue in the Compiz logo offends you. Maybe you're upset that Compiz won't bend over backwards to integrate perfectly with your desktop environment.

Choice is an illusion without the ability to achieve the same results with different tools. With only one compositing manager capable of what Compiz does, to say that I can choose not to use Compiz is like saying I have no choice at all.

I don't like the fact that there's an increasing lot of commercial software preying on unsuspecting people who think they have no other choice. But I appreciate the fact that people who cannot use or do not like other compositing managers, have an alternative.

[Fyda]

Isn't nearly all the core code under the MIT/X11 license? That makes it kind of hard to steal (though not necessarily impossible) :-)
I made that latter statement with the presumption that it'd be slightly rather quite very hard to actually steal code from Compiz (verbatim at least). ;)

[some-guy]

a list of copied effects :D:
Flip3D(Vista)
CoverFlow(OS X)
Spaces(OS X, well not really)
Scale(OS X, KWin, etc)
Genie(OS X)
Glide effect(Vista open/close window animation)
Drop shadows around windows and menus(OS X)
Focus Stealing Prevention(Windows 2000)
Taskbar Thumbnails(Vista)
Window Rules(KWin)
Alpha Blur(Vista)
Reflection(Vista)
Wobbly Windows(early Longhorn demo)
Splash(lots and lots)
Resize Info(KWin)
ScaleFilter(KWin)
Tabbed Windows(Fluxbox)
Snapping Windows(KWin)
Tile Windows(Windows 95+)
Mouse wheel shortcut for increasing/decreasing opacity(DirectFB)
and more... ;)

[Deciare]

That list looks familiar. Where have I seen it (http://forum.compiz-fusion.org/showpost.php?p=41561&postcount=9) before (http://forum.compiz-fusion.org/showpost.php?p=41565&postcount=10)...? ;)

I like the colour coding you added, though. Derivative works in action!