Re: Possible GPL Violation

["Måns Rullgård" <mru@inprovide.com>]

Carlos Silva <r3pek@r3pek.homelinux.org> writes:

>> > The thing is that i asked for the kernel source they use in the
>> > system and they said they can't give it since they have some
>> > proprietary code in it, as far as i understood.
>> 
>> If they use some modules of their own writing, the general agreement
>> seems to be that they don't need to release the source code to those.
>> They should still give you the kernel source they used, along with any
>> patches they may have applied.
>
> I know this too. The thing is that they don't give me anything. They
> only sell me the appliance, nothing more. :(

All too common.  You should begin by kindly pointing out what their
obligations are, and if they fail to comply, switch to a harsher tone,
and post your correspondence in a public place.  I'm not certain that
lkml is the proper place for this, but it may be the only place we
have.  If all else fails, slashdot them.  That will probably also
fail, but at least you can enjoy watching other people call them
names.

>> > I really don't know the proper way to report a GPL violation so i
>> > thought this was a good place.  If there is any question please feel
>> > free to ask, i'll do my best to answer it.
>> 
>> I'm having some problems myself with an STB manufacturer (Amino).  The
>> STB is running a Busybox/Montavista Linux of some kind, and I need to
>> make some changes.  To do this, they tell me I need the SDK, which is
>> only available under NDA, and then only after purchasing a support
>> contract for an ungodly number of dollars.  Somehow, I get the feeling
>> they are on thin ice here.
>> 
> Panda uses debian in this appliance ;)

That's a bit ironic, considering that Debian are among those that take
the "freedom" thing most seriously.  Maybe you can get some ideas from
the debian-legal list.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@inprovide.com