[Note, suspect this didn't appear earlier because of vger disliking
mention of De*tschland!]
Hi,
I've been talking with UK company Amstrad PLC regarding their
obligations under the GNU GPL for the Linux they ship on their new E3
videophone in the UK.
http://www.amstrad.com/default.shtml
http://www.amstrad.com/e3_intro.html
It's based on a TI OMAP ARM SoC and runs MontaVista Linux.
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS6619549199.html
http://www.amstrad.com/news_linux.html
http://www.mvista.com/news/2004/amstrad.html
They're shipping the E3 in a box for sale off the shelf in places like
Dixons, Currys, etc. I believe they haven't complied with section 3 of
the GNU GPL. There's no source shipped in the box, i.e. 3(a). There's
no written notice either, 3(b), in the thick manual, or the other sheets
of paper in the box, printed on the box, or on stickers on the E3. I
inspected the contents of a box, serial number available if required, at
my local store with the agreement of a staff member who opened all the
wrappings. The manual had "Issue No. 9 (D1/H4)" printed at the bottom
right corner of page 1, as does the online PDF of the manual available
for download.
ftp://ftp.amstrad.co.uk/e3_userguide_web_v1.zip 9,614,278 bytes
I am not an E3 owner, nor have I been passed the GPL'd binaries with or
without a written offer under 3(c).
Initially I tried discussing their compliance with
[email protected] but they were only willing to discuss source
access details on presentation of proof of purchase, e.g. serial number,
registered phone number, etc., and weren't willing to discuss if they
were complying with the GPL.
So I next emailed Sir Alan Sugar, Amstrad Chairman, and got a reply from
Brian Eaton, E-Business Director. He initially, like Support, seemed
confident they were complying but I got the impression he hadn't
actually read my argument so I tried once more to point out how what
they were doing wasn't complying. This time I got a reply saying
"Your comments are noted. We will get back to you shortly. In the
meantime can you let me have your postal address please so that I
can send you something?"
This, coupled with activity to my Amstrad Linux page from several
browsers at an IP address similar to Amstrad's public ones around the
time Brian's reply was sent, makes me think I should make the issue
public before anything that would prevent me doing that may happen.
All my correspondence is attached but the most interesting is message 9
where I spell out the license requirements to Brian Eaton, 10 where he
yesterday asked for my address, and 11 where he re-stated they've don't
have to discuss it with me. I think they're failing to comply with
section 3. There's other minor things too in the manual that I've
highlighted. They're right in saying they've no obligation to discuss
their compliance with me. I'm hoping that by posting here a copyright
holder will query their apparent lack of compliance and Amstrad will be
happy to converse with them.
To re-iterate, there's no source code or written offer in the box. They
say they'll provide a URL to an E3 owner on proof of ownership but
that's insufficient. The situation is made more complex by the E3
downloading software updates, including seemingly the kernel, so they'll
be multiple versions to provide source for over time.
Cheers,
Ralph.
------- Forwarded Messages
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Thu Sep 23 23:57:40 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from blake.inputplus.co.uk (ralph@localhost)
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8NMvdI03159;
Thu, 23 Sep 2004 23:57:40 +0100
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Source for E3's MontaVista Linux.
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 23:57:39 +0100
From: Ralph Corderoy <[email protected]>
Hi,
I see from the joint MontaVista/Amstrad press release that MontaVista
Linux has been chosen for the E3's operating system. I've had a hunt
around the amstrad.co.uk web site and haven't been able to find a
download of the source for the binaries shipped on the E3 that are
covered by the GNU General Public License.
Could you please let me know how to obtain them.
Many thanks,
Ralph.
------- Message 2
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Fri Sep 24 14:13:40 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8ODDeu07998
for <ralph@localhost>; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:13:40 +0100
Delivered-To: inputplu-inputplus:co:[email protected]
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
Received: from inputplus.co.uk [66.39.34.92]
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.0)
for ralph@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:13:40 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 42269 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2004 13:07:22 -0000
Received: from mail.amstrad.co.uk (HELO mrs.amstrad.co.uk) (193.133.25.43)
by ruis.pair.com with SMTP; 24 Sep 2004 13:07:22 -0000
Received: from mailserver2.amstrad.co.uk ([192.9.200.8]) by mrs.amstrad.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713);
Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:07:21 +0100
Received: by MAILSERVER2 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id <SST6CYKP>; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:07:21 +0100
Message-ID: <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD5039BD5D3@MAILSERVER2>
From: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
To: "'Ralph Corderoy'" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Source for E3's MontaVista Linux.
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:07:19 +0100
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Sep 2004 13:07:21.0679 (UTC) FILETIME=[6D7965F0:01C4A237]
X-Spam-Filtered: 52d0813afd638bc4ffa68db06ca49a29
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Level:
Thank you for your email.
Please provide the serial number from your E3 unit (located on the underside
of the unit or by pressing SETUP and option 1) so that we can provide these
details.
Regards
Amserve Support
- -----Original Message-----
[Snip duplicate of message 1.]
------- Message 3
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Sat Sep 25 10:20:53 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from blake.inputplus.co.uk (ralph@localhost)
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8P9Krn05212;
Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:20:53 +0100
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Source for E3's MontaVista Linux.
In-Reply-To: Message from Amserve Support <[email protected]>
of "Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:07:19 BST." <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD5039BD5D3@MAILSERVER2>
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:20:53 +0100
From: Ralph Corderoy <[email protected]>
Dear Support,
Thanks for your prompt reply.
> > I see from the joint MontaVista/Amstrad press release that
> > MontaVista Linux has been chosen for the E3's operating system.
> > I've had a hunt around the amstrad.co.uk web site and haven't been
> > able to find a download of the source for the binaries shipped on
> > the E3 that are covered by the GNU General Public License.
> >
> > Could you please let me know how to obtain them.
>
> Please provide the serial number from your E3 unit (located on the
> underside of the unit or by pressing SETUP and option 1) so that we
> can provide these details.
I can't do that as I don't have an E3. I was assuming that out of the
three choices, a, b, or c, from section 3 of the GNU GPL, Amstrad had
chosen b.
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html#SEC3
You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms
of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the
following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software
interchange; or,
Let me know if a has been chosen and I'll contact an E3 owner who'll
already have the source and may be willing to distribute it to me.
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a
medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
I assumed Amstrad chose b and I am turning up as `any third party'
requesting a copy of the source code.
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the
offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative
is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
c doesn't seem a possible choice for Amstrad.
a is a useful one because it means that parties cannot request source
from Amstrad as Amstrad ensured source travelled with all binaries. It
becomes more awkward if the device may update its GPL'd software after
shipping to the customer though.
To save overhead, b can be largely satisfied by making the various
versions of source available on the Internet for download as they are
distributed in binary form. Most people wanting the source would prefer
this method although as I understand it Internet access alone isn't
sufficient to satisfy section 3 and a physical medium, obtainable by
mail-order, must also be available even if no one ever uses it.
As ever with these things, I am not a lawyer so if you think my
interpretation is wrong I'd like to know. Otherwise, could you please
let me know which one of 3a, 3b, and 3c Amstrad have chosen so I can
continue in trying to obtain the GPL'd source.
Thanks,
Ralph.
------- Message 4
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Mon Sep 27 11:39:07 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8RAd7A05038
for <ralph@localhost>; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:39:07 +0100
Delivered-To: inputplu-inputplus:co:[email protected]
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
Received: from inputplus.co.uk [66.39.34.92]
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.0)
for ralph@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:39:07 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 36748 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2004 10:26:30 -0000
Received: from mail.amstrad.co.uk (HELO mrs.amstrad.co.uk) (193.133.25.43)
by ruis.pair.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2004 10:26:30 -0000
Received: from mailserver2.amstrad.co.uk ([192.9.200.8]) by mrs.amstrad.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713);
Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:26:27 +0100
Received: by MAILSERVER2 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id <SST6DJTP>; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:26:27 +0100
Message-ID: <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD5039BD60F@MAILSERVER2>
From: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Source for E3's MontaVista Linux.
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:26:21 +0100
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Sep 2004 10:26:27.0492 (UTC) FILETIME=[725E9E40:01C4A47C]
X-Spam-Filtered: 52d0813afd638bc4ffa68db06ca49a29
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Level:
Amserve will require the following information in order to divulge any
further informatiom
Date of Purchase
Retailer
Serial Number of E Mailer unit
E Mail address.
Telephone number
Regards Amserve
- -----Original Message-----
[Snip duplicate of message 3.]
------- Message 5
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Mon Sep 27 13:08:08 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from blake.inputplus.co.uk (ralph@localhost)
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8RC88D06215;
Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:08:08 +0100
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: FW: Source for E3's MontaVista Linux.
In-Reply-To: Message from Amserve Support <[email protected]>
of "Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:26:21 BST." <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD5039BD60F@MAILSERVER2>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:08:08 +0100
From: Ralph Corderoy <[email protected]>
Dear Support,
> > > Please provide the serial number from your E3 unit (located on the
> > > underside of the unit or by pressing SETUP and option 1) so that
> > > we can provide these details.
> >
> > I can't do that as I don't have an E3. I was assuming that out of
> > the three choices, a, b, or c, from section 3 of the GNU GPL,
> > Amstrad had chosen b.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > As ever with these things, I am not a lawyer so if you think my
> > interpretation is wrong I'd like to know. Otherwise, could you
> > please let me know which one of 3a, 3b, and 3c Amstrad have chosen
> > so I can continue in trying to obtain the GPL'd source.
>
> Amserve will require the following information in order to divulge any
> further informatiom
>
> Date of Purchase, Retailer, Serial Number of E Mailer unit, E Mail
> address, Telephone number.
Could you answer a simpler question? If I buy an E3 at Dixons and open
it will I find the GPL'd source code in the box, or will I find a
written offer to provide it? It must be one of these two otherwise
Amstrad are in violation of the GNU GPL version 2, as explained in my
previous email, that covers some of the binaries shipped in the E3 and
as such their rights under the GPL are terminated, see section 4.
4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is
void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this
License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from
you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so
long as such parties remain in full compliance.
In other words, Amstrad would be infringing copyright by selling E3s
which is a serious and easily avoidable situation.
This almost certainly isn't the case, but issuing a standard `please
supply your serial number' to all enquiries is inadequate if section 3b
of the GPL has been followed.
If that's the only procedure that has been presented to Amserve Support
perhaps my simpler question above can be passed internally to an area
that deals with licensing and copyright.
Thanks,
Ralph.
------- Message 6
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Mon Sep 27 14:16:59 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8RDGwA09799
for <ralph@localhost>; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:16:58 +0100
Delivered-To: inputplu-inputplus:co:[email protected]
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
Received: from inputplus.co.uk [66.39.34.92]
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.0)
for ralph@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:16:58 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 91407 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2004 13:08:11 -0000
Received: from mail.amstrad.co.uk (HELO mrs.amstrad.co.uk) (193.133.25.43)
by ruis.pair.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2004 13:08:11 -0000
Received: from mailserver2.amstrad.co.uk ([192.9.200.8]) by mrs.amstrad.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713);
Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:08:10 +0100
Received: by MAILSERVER2 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id <SST6DKP0>; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:08:10 +0100
Message-ID: <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD5039BD615@MAILSERVER2>
From: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
To: "'Ralph Corderoy'" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: FW: Source for E3's MontaVista Linux.
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:08:08 +0100
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Sep 2004 13:08:10.0774 (UTC) FILETIME=[09F9F360:01C4A493]
X-Spam-Filtered: 52d0813afd638bc4ffa68db06ca49a29
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Level:
Thank you for your email.
We are happy to explain how we comply with the GPL to our customers. To
date, it appears that this is not so in your case. Should you purchase an E3
personal communication centre and wish to continue this correspondence,
please provide us with the unit serial number, registered email address and
purchase details we have previously requested. Following which, we will
forward the necessary information.
Regards
Amserve Support
- -----Original Message-----
[Snip duplicate of message 5.]
------- Message 7
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Mon Sep 27 23:33:22 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from blake.inputplus.co.uk (ralph@localhost)
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8RMXLd04471;
Mon, 27 Sep 2004 23:33:21 +0100
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: Sir Alan Sugar <[email protected]>
Subject: Possible GNU GPL License Violation by Amstrad E3.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----- =_aaaaaaaaaa0"
Content-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 23:33:21 +0100
From: Ralph Corderoy <[email protected]>
- ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <[email protected]>
Dear Sir Alan,
Since last Thursday I've been conversing by email with
[email protected] regarding the meeting the license conditions of
some parts of the software that ships with Amstrad's E3. In particular,
the Linux kernel used on the E3, as announced in a joint
Amstrad/MontaVista press release, is covered by the GNU General Public
License, GPL, version 2.
http://www.amstrad.com/news_linux.html
Perhaps understandably, given their role in supporting owners of an E3,
Support are reluctant to discuss the license compliance further unless I
can provide a serial number, etc., which, given I've not purchased an
E3, I don't have. Consequently, I'm writing to you in the hope of
straightening out any license infringement, or correcting my
understanding. Let me make clear, I'm delighted Amstrad have used Linux
on the E3 and wish nothing more than to see Linux's license complied
with allowing me to obtain the GPL'd source code under the terms of the
license -- I have no wish to damage Amstrad's reputation in any way.
I'm hoping you can forward my concerns onto the relevant party inside
Amstrad.
The GNU GPL version 2 aims to ensure that recipients of a GPL'd program
in object code or executable form, e.g. E3 purchaser, can obtain the
exact same source code that created the binary files. The whole license
is available at
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
I think the core issue is that Amstrad received the Linux kernel
licensed under the GPL and must therefore follow its conditions in their
distribution of Linux, as stored in the E3.
I believe section 3 of the GPL is the relevant part. It starts
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms
of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the
following:
and the E3 contains a work based on Linux in executable form.
The three choices allowed are
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software
interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a
medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the
offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative
is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
Complying with (a) would mean the source code is in the box, probably on
a CD, alongside the E3.
(b) would mean there's a written offer in the E3's box to give *any
third party*, not just an E3 purchaser, i.e. me, the source code at
cost.
I don't believe (c) is available to Amstrad since the E3 is a commercial
distribution and I doubt Amstrad received Linux in non-source form from
MontaVista.
Visiting my local Dixons today, and with the help of an assistant who
let me go through a new E3 box, I have the serial number if that's of
help, I found no source code (a), and no written offer (b). Just a
"This product contains software that is subject to licence terms."
inside the manual's front cover. Thus I believe Amstrad are violating
the terms of Linux's license in not doing one of 3(a), 3(b), or 3(c).
This is the most apparent violation but I am not a lawyer and I've no
doubt that Amstrad had lawyers and assistance from MontaVista in looking
over the GPL before shipping the E3. If I'm wrong I'd like to know
Amstrad's interpretation of the license and how they comply and they may
wish to publicise their compliance in order that others don't follow me
in asking.
Otherwise, if Amstrad are violating the GPL then, under section 4, their
rights to distribute the program are terminated, i.e. distributing the
E3 is copyright infringement.
4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is
void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this
License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from
you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so
long as such parties remain in full compliance.
I have further minor issues with GPL compliance but section 3 is the
main one. Others include
The manual stating "Software (C) Amstrad plc. 1999-2004. All
rights reserved."; clearly some of the software's copyright doesn't
reside with Amstrad but with Linux's copyright holders.
Page 155 states
"You must not copy, de-compile, modify, change, sell, lend,
sub-license or by other means interfere with or exploit the
software of the e-m@iler. Nor must you change the
factory-installed software in the e-m@iler, except where such
change is an upgrade or modification version released by
Amserve."
but section 3 allows me to copy and distribute the GPL'd binaries I
received in the E3 as long as I comply with 3(c), i.e. don't charge
for distribution and accompany it with the written offer I (didn't)
receive with the E3. Attempting to restrict my right to do this
violates GPL section 6.
6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on
the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license
from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the
Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not
impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of
the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing
compliance by third parties to this License.
I suspect these arise from taking the Emailer Plus manual and altering
it for the E3 without considering GPL compliance.
One further tricky point to consider is section 3 clarifies
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
control compilation and installation of the executable.
This means that each time Amstrad alter and distribute the GPL'd
software on the E3, e.g. an improvement to Linux to support wireless LAN
downloaded to the E3 overnight, they must make available the matching
source code, build, and installation scripts.
I'd like to know if Amstrad agree that they're violating the GPL and
what they intend to change to try and follow the spirit of the GPL
despite having already shipped E3s. As I'm not a copyright holder of
any part of the Linux kernel I obviously have no right to condone any
changes. I'm merely trying to obtain the source code and see the
license complied with for the good of all Linux licensees, including
Amstrad.
Below are my recent emails with Support.
Thanks,
Ralph Corderoy.
- ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----- =_aaaaaaaaaa1"
Content-ID: <[email protected]>
- ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa1
Content-Type: message/rfc822
[Snip duplicate of message 1-6.]
- ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa1--
- ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0--
------- Message 8
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Tue Sep 28 11:13:00 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8SACxh12987
for <ralph@localhost>; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:13:00 +0100
Delivered-To: inputplu-inputplus:co:[email protected]
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
Received: from inputplus.co.uk [66.39.34.92]
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.0)
for ralph@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:13:00 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 98079 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2004 09:50:33 -0000
Received: from mail.amstrad.co.uk (HELO mrs.amstrad.co.uk) (193.133.25.43)
by ruis.pair.com with SMTP; 28 Sep 2004 09:50:33 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Received: from mailserver2.amstrad.co.uk ([192.9.200.8]) by mrs.amstrad.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:50:32 +0100
Received: by MAILSERVER2 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <SST6DRVG>; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:50:32 +0100
Message-ID: <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD50329D2EF@MAILSERVER2>
From: Brian Eaton <[email protected]>
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
CC: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Possible GNU GPL License Violation by Amstrad E3.
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:50:22 +0100
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2004 09:50:32.0312 (UTC) FILETIME=[9831FF80:01C4A540]
X-Spam-Filtered: 52d0813afd638bc4ffa68db06ca49a29
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=4.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME,BAYES_01
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Level:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by blake.inputplus.co.uk id i8SACxh12987
Dear Mr Corderoy
I refer to the email of 27 Sept that you sent to Sir Alan Sugar. Sir Alan
has asked me to respond.
Please note the following:
We have an obligation to our customers (the recipients of the object code)
to make the source code of the kernel (not the whole of our code) available
to them. You, with respect, are not a customer. Our customer services -
after asking for proof of purchase and registration - will point customers
to a web address where the kernel can be found.
Our position is that
1) You are not one of our customers. We only have obligations to our
customers (the recipients). We do have an obligation to the copyright owners
of Linux, but with respect you are not one of them either.
2) We have told everyone clearly that we are working with MontaVista and
using their Linux.
Yours sincerely
Brian Eaton
E-Business Director
Amstrad Plc
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended exclusively for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender immediately. This message is attributed to the sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Amstrad Plc or its subsidiaries.
For further information on Amstrad Plc please visit our website: http://www.amstrad.com
Amstrad Plc.
Brentwood House
169 Kings Road
Brentwood
Essex CM14 4EF
Registered in England : No. 955321
------- Message 9
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Tue Sep 28 16:06:37 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from blake.inputplus.co.uk (ralph@localhost)
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8SF6bG17264;
Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:06:37 +0100
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: Brian Eaton <[email protected]>
cc: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Possible GNU GPL License Violation by Amstrad E3.
In-Reply-To: Message from Brian Eaton <[email protected]>
of "Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:50:22 BST." <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD50329D2EF@MAILSERVER2>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:06:37 +0100
From: Ralph Corderoy <[email protected]>
Dear Mr. Eaton,
> I refer to the email of 27 Sept that you sent to Sir Alan Sugar. Sir
> Alan has asked me to respond.
Thank you.
> Please note the following:
>
> We have an obligation to our customers (the recipients of the object
> code) to make the source code of the kernel (not the whole of our
> code) available to them.
You have an obligation under the GNU GPL to supply your customers, who
are the E3 purchasers and initial recipients of the GPL'd object code,
with either the source code alongside the E3 (3a), or a written offer to
any third party to supply the source code (3b). From inspection of the
E3's box's contents I believe you're doing neither and hence are in
violation of the GPL.
There is no disagreement that not all of the software on the E3 is
licensed under the GPL.
> You, with respect, are not a customer. Our customer services - after
> asking for proof of purchase and registration - will point customers
> to a web address where the kernel can be found.
No, I'm not a customer. I'm just someone who's contributing my own free
time to try and help Amstrad comply with the license without it all
snowballing into a situation like the Welte v. Sitecom De*tschland GmbH
case in the Munchen District Court where an injunction on Sitecom was
upheld.
You seem to feel that supplying E3 owners, on proof of purchase, with a
web address where the source can be found meets your obligations under
the GPL. It doesn't. You seem to be going for 3(b) of the GPL where
source is made available separately from the object code. But an
important part of the GPL is that recipients of GPL'd code know it is
GPL'd and what their rights are. Hence 3(b)'s `written offer' which
informs the E3 owner of their rights and which owners of the E3 can pass
on when copying the E3's GPL'd object code to anyone they wish under
3(c).
Someone who receives the E3's GPL'd binaries along with Amstrad's
written offer, either by purchasing an E3, or by being passed both by
someone who already has them, can take up Amstrad's offer of supplying
the source code *to any third party* despite not owning an E3 or having
its serial number.
Anyone who has the GPL'd source code from Amstrad can, under section 1
of the GPL, make it available, e.g. on the Internet, to all and sundry.
Given this, Amstrad's attempt to seemingly keep it to E3 owners only, or
track distribution by serial number, seems mis-guided.
> Our position is that 1) You are not one of our customers. We only have
> obligations to our customers (the recipients). We do have an
> obligation to the copyright owners of Linux, but with respect you are
> not one of them either.
Despite not being a customer, or a copyright holder, I believe that
Amstrad are failing to comply with the GPL. If Amstrad continue to fail
to answer the specific points I've made I will take the matter to the
Linux kernel copyright holders by posting the issue on the public Linux
Kernel Mailing List, [email protected].
> 2) We have told everyone clearly that we are working with MontaVista
> and using their Linux.
I am surprised MontaVista have not advised Amstrad more precisely over
their obligations. You may wish to consult them again.
Thanks,
Ralph Corderoy.
------- Message 10
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Tue Sep 28 17:13:43 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8SGDgh19211
for <ralph@localhost>; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:13:43 +0100
Delivered-To: inputplu-inputplus:co:[email protected]
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
Received: from inputplus.co.uk [66.39.34.92]
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.0)
for ralph@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:13:43 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 31142 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2004 16:10:10 -0000
Received: from mail.amstrad.co.uk (HELO mrs.amstrad.co.uk) (193.133.25.43)
by ruis.pair.com with SMTP; 28 Sep 2004 16:10:10 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Received: from mailserver2.amstrad.co.uk ([192.9.200.8]) by mrs.amstrad.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:10:09 +0100
Received: by MAILSERVER2 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <SST6DT0L>; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:10:09 +0100
Message-ID: <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD50329D2F6@MAILSERVER2>
From: Brian Eaton <[email protected]>
To: "'Ralph Corderoy'" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Possible GNU GPL License Violation by Amstrad E3.
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:10:08 +0100
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2004 16:10:09.0971 (UTC) FILETIME=[A0BCF030:01C4A575]
X-Spam-Filtered: 52d0813afd638bc4ffa68db06ca49a29
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=4.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Level:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by blake.inputplus.co.uk id i8SGDgh19211
Dear Mr Corderoy
Your comments are noted. We will get back to you shortly. In the meantime
can you let me have your postal address please so that I can send you
something?
Yours sincerely
Brian Eaton
E-Business Director
Amstrad Plc
- -----Original Message-----
[Snip duplicate of message 9.]
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended exclusively for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender immediately. This message is attributed to the sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Amstrad Plc or its subsidiaries.
For further information on Amstrad Plc please visit our website: http://www.amstrad.com
Amstrad Plc.
Brentwood House
169 Kings Road
Brentwood
Essex CM14 4EF
Registered in England : No. 955321
------- Message 11
Return-Path: [email protected]
Delivery-Date: Wed Sep 29 12:48:50 2004
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by blake.inputplus.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8TBmmW09654
for <ralph@localhost>; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:48:50 +0100
Delivered-To: inputplu-inputplus:co:[email protected]
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
Received: from inputplus.co.uk [66.39.34.92]
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.0)
for ralph@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:48:50 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 18673 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2004 11:46:24 -0000
Received: from mail.amstrad.co.uk (HELO mrs.amstrad.co.uk) (193.133.25.43)
by ruis.pair.com with SMTP; 29 Sep 2004 11:46:24 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Received: from mailserver2.amstrad.co.uk ([192.9.200.8]) by mrs.amstrad.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:46:22 +0100
Received: by MAILSERVER2 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <SST6DZBZ>; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:46:23 +0100
Message-ID: <EC49BB70F1DDD6118C620002B3512AD50329D301@MAILSERVER2>
From: Brian Eaton <[email protected]>
To: "'Ralph Corderoy'" <[email protected]>
CC: Amserve Support <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Possible GNU GPL License Violation by Amstrad E3.
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:46:22 +0100
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Sep 2004 11:46:22.0618 (UTC) FILETIME=[F15047A0:01C4A619]
X-Spam-Filtered: 52d0813afd638bc4ffa68db06ca49a29
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.4 required=4.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME,NO_OBLIGATION,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Level:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by blake.inputplus.co.uk id i8TBmmW09654
Dear Mr Corderoy
Any customer who buys one of our videophones will see that our
obligations under the GPL are met and clearly explained to them. If you
were to become a customer it would be clear to you. In the meantime we have
no
obligation to explain to non-customers our policy.
Brian Eaton
E-Business Director
Amstrad Plc
- -----Original Message-----
[Snip duplicate of message 9.]
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended exclusively for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender immediately. This message is attributed to the sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Amstrad Plc or its subsidiaries.
For further information on Amstrad Plc please visit our website: http://www.amstrad.com
Amstrad Plc.
Brentwood House
169 Kings Road
Brentwood
Essex CM14 4EF
Registered in England : No. 955321
------- End of Forwarded Messages
On Wednesday 29 September 2004 16:44, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
[snip]
> All my correspondence is attached but the most interesting is message 9
> where I spell out the license requirements to Brian Eaton, 10 where he
> yesterday asked for my address, and 11 where he re-stated they've don't
> have to discuss it with me. I think they're failing to comply with
> section 3. There's other minor things too in the manual that I've
> highlighted. They're right in saying they've no obligation to discuss
> their compliance with me. I'm hoping that by posting here a copyright
> holder will query their apparent lack of compliance and Amstrad will be
> happy to converse with them.
>
> To re-iterate, there's no source code or written offer in the box. They
> say they'll provide a URL to an E3 owner on proof of ownership but
> that's insufficient. The situation is made more complex by the E3
> downloading software updates, including seemingly the kernel, so they'll
> be multiple versions to provide source for over time.
You did an awesome work. I will save this message as an example
just in case I will need to do something similar.
Unfortunately I have no E3. Hope someone who has will contact you.
--
vda
On Gwe, 2004-10-01 at 15:52, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> You did an awesome work. I will save this message as an example
> just in case I will need to do something similar.
>
> Unfortunately I have no E3. Hope someone who has will contact you.
Actually by the time this made the kernel list an answer turned up from
Amstrad - the URL for the GPL source, and an offer valid for three years
to supply it at cost is in the welcome email their units start up with.
Alan
Hi Alan,
Alan Cox wrote:
> Actually by the time this made the kernel list an answer turned up
> from Amstrad - the URL for the GPL source, and an offer valid for
> three years to supply it at cost is in the welcome email their units
> start up with.
dwmw2 is reporting off-list that the URL is "for the [MontaVista] devkit
they started from".
And the written offer is in the welcome email *now* but probably wasn't
until I hassled them. It also doesn't meet 3(b) so they're not
complying. The way the E3 works is that it won't do anything after
power on until you plug it into your phone line. Then it dials Amstrad
(Amsurf), asks you questions, e.g. name, and registers this along with
your phone number, serial number, and preferred email address with
Amstrad.
*After that* you get a `welcome email' containing the written offer.
Sorry, but I have the binaries once I walk out the shop. Where's my
written offer? What do I do if I bought one and got it shipped to
France and so it won't `phone home'?
Cheers,
Ralph.
Alan Cox wrote:
> On Gwe, 2004-10-01 at 15:52, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
>
>>You did an awesome work. I will save this message as an example
>>just in case I will need to do something similar.
>>
>>Unfortunately I have no E3. Hope someone who has will contact you.
>
>
> Actually by the time this made the kernel list an answer turned up from
> Amstrad - the URL for the GPL source, and an offer valid for three years
> to supply it at cost is in the welcome email their units start up with.
>
> Alan
>
And the URL is?
On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 16:59:41 +0100, Ralph Corderoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> > Actually by the time this made the kernel list an answer turned up
> > from Amstrad - the URL for the GPL source, and an offer valid for
> > three years to supply it at cost is in the welcome email their units
> > start up with.
The E3 uses Montavista Linux and as far as I am aware they made little
or no changes to that for the product. Most of the perceived problem
here is, I think, just misunderstanding.
It also seems you're overly keen for Amstrad to be in the wrong here,
but the reality is that Alan Sugar (or his son/relative in charge of
various PR activities) is not going to have these answers readily
available for you. Someone will know and provide you with the
information that you are after - but it's worth treating the lack of
informtation as a small oversight.
While the E3 is quoted as not using any other "Open Source" software,
it does use Monta's Linux. I would suggest that you contact the folks
at Montavista's UK offices in Bracknell and ask them about obtaining a
link to the source.mvista.com and similar websites where you can
obtain a copy of the sources used in their distribution. They are
friendly people.
> And the written offer is in the welcome email *now* but probably wasn't
> until I hassled them.
They probably overlooked it. Yes that's not great - but I wouldn't get
too worked up over it. The reality is that you asked for a copy of the
source and eventually it seems that you will get what you want. It
would be nice if this process were entirely seemless but it's
certainly a lot better than many examples I've seen elsewhere.
> It also doesn't meet 3(b) so they're not complying.
Technically I think you might be correct there - but I'd give them the
benefit of the doubt and assume they just need to read the license
over and make a change to some packaging.
I'm planning to do a review of the E3 so I'll be sure to look in to
these issues then.
Cheers,
Jon.
On Gwe, 2004-10-01 at 17:24, Jon Masters wrote:
> I'm planning to do a review of the E3 so I'll be sure to look in to
> these issues then.
Everything I've seen from Amstrad on the subject has ben friendly,
helpful and clear. I've dealt with a few cases of vendors clearly
trying to break the rules, but Amstrad is not one of them. They answer
email, they give clear and honest answers, and the code is out there.
If anyone has a copy of the emailer source btw (or gets one for review
so has a download option ;)) then it would be nice to stick it up for
ftp for all.
Alan
On Gwe, 2004-10-01 at 16:59, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> And the written offer is in the welcome email *now* but probably wasn't
> until I hassled them.
Well fine, you can't magically fix mistakes in documentation. You'd also
I think find the law took the same view.
> *After that* you get a `welcome email' containing the written offer.
> Sorry, but I have the binaries once I walk out the shop. Where's my
> written offer? What do I do if I bought one and got it shipped to
> France and so it won't `phone home'?
You know I regularly hear people talking about the "spirit of the
license", but that goes in both directions. From discussions my own
impression is that in this case they may or may not have forgotten to
put it in the manual but they've done their best to be compliant and
they have no desire not to be compliant.
On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 16:59:44 +0100, Alan Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Gwe, 2004-10-01 at 17:24, Jon Masters wrote:
> > I'm planning to do a review of the E3 so I'll be sure to look in to
> > these issues then.
>
> Everything I've seen from Amstrad on the subject has ben friendly,
> helpful and clear. I've dealt with a few cases of vendors clearly
> trying to break the rules, but Amstrad is not one of them. They answer
> email, they give clear and honest answers, and the code is out there.
I don't think they're evil either. Hassling vendors can do more harm
than good, let's not do that.
> If anyone has a copy of the emailer source btw (or gets one for review
> so has a download option ;)) then it would be nice to stick it up for
> ftp for all.
I'll be talking to Monta about doing a review of the E3. I'll look in
to getting hold of the source at that point.
Jon.
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> *After that* you get a `welcome email' containing the written offer.
> Sorry, but I have the binaries once I walk out the shop. Where's my
> written offer? What do I do if I bought one and got it shipped to
> France and so it won't `phone home'?
Greetings Ralph,
I think that the "research" you have been doing was a clear waste of time
of people at Amstrad who were, as it turns out, not even breaking any
laws.
Alan Cox has cleared up everything, and so your best option, I think, is
to kindly apologize to Amstrad for wasting their time and not continue
with your irritating "what if this" and "what if that"s, unless you are a
lawyer and therefore delight in the waste of time of this sort (or even
paid to do that).
Having said that, I also saved your first email in the "useful" folder ---
as a classical example of what to expect from someone with little clue but
much "zeal" for the enforcement of GPL putting his nose in every hole he
can find :)
Kind regards
Tigran
On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 04:59:44PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Gwe, 2004-10-01 at 17:24, Jon Masters wrote:
> > I'm planning to do a review of the E3 so I'll be sure to look in to
> > these issues then.
> Everything I've seen from Amstrad on the subject has ben friendly,
> helpful and clear. I've dealt with a few cases of vendors clearly
> trying to break the rules, but Amstrad is not one of them. They answer
> email, they give clear and honest answers, and the code is out there.
>
> If anyone has a copy of the emailer source btw (or gets one for review
> so has a download option ;)) then it would be nice to stick it up for
> ftp for all.
No one seems to have done this, and the offer Amstrad makes requires the
sending off of ?25 to them to cover admin and distribution costs rather
than allowing a download of it. I did this a few days ago so will
hopefully hear from them in the next week or so.
J.
--
"f u cn rd ths, u cn gt a gd jb | .''`. Debian GNU/Linux Developer
n cmptr prgrmmng." -- Simon | : :' : Happy to accept PGP signed
Cozens, ox.os.linux | `. `' or encrypted mail - RSA +
| `- DSA keys on the keyservers.
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 09:48:52PM +0000, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 04:59:44PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > If anyone has a copy of the emailer source btw (or gets one for review
> > so has a download option ;)) then it would be nice to stick it up for
> > ftp for all.
> No one seems to have done this, and the offer Amstrad makes requires the
> sending off of ?25 to them to cover admin and distribution costs rather
> than allowing a download of it. I did this a few days ago so will
> hopefully hear from them in the next week or so.
I've now received this and it's linked from:
http://www.earth.li/~noodles/hardware-e3.html
Interesting (to me at least) points:
* Camera source included and seems to present as a standard v4l device.
* The keyboard driver is a module (not included) - there's a stub
present presumably so basic init works.
* The Pegasus USB networking module is compiled in; I've confirmed it
initialises such a device, but see no network traffic (CONFIG_IP_PNP
and friends are enabled in the .config provided, but I guess this may
be from a debug tree?)
* There's Belkin USB serial device support in the .config as well, but I
can't see any output when I hook up such a device.
I've setup a list at:
http://www.earth.li/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/e3-hacking
for anyone who wants to discuss the hardware/software of the device.
What I'd really like to see is a dump of the flash from the device, in
the hope that the startup scripts might do something with the ethernet.
However I don't have the appropriate kit to be able to do this.
Alternatively it looks like there's a serial console on ttyS0 (UART1 on
the OMAP?), but I can't see any obvious pads where that's brought out
to.
(Oh, and as a semi related aside; if anyone has GPL contacts in Linksys
I'd be most interested to know about them - I'm completely failing to
get hold of kernel source for the WMA11B, which runs 2.4.17-rmk3-cot1.)
J.
--
"I can see an opening for the four lusers of the Apocalypse... 'I
didn't change anything', 'My e-mail doesn't work', 'I can't print' and
'Is the network broken?'." -- Paul Mc Auley, asr
On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 01:43:10PM +0000, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 09:48:52PM +0000, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 04:59:44PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > If anyone has a copy of the emailer source btw (or gets one for review
> > > so has a download option ;)) then it would be nice to stick it up for
> > > ftp for all.
> > No one seems to have done this, and the offer Amstrad makes requires the
> > sending off of ?25 to them to cover admin and distribution costs rather
> > than allowing a download of it. I did this a few days ago so will
> > hopefully hear from them in the next week or so.
> I've now received this.
Which turns out not to actually be what they're using; what I have
source for is "2.4.18_mvl30-E3" whereas my E3 has
"2.4.18_mvl30-ams-delta". Also there's no sign of a dfdblk/MFS-DFD
driver in the provided source, but the dmesg output of the E3 clearly
shows such a driver initialising before any filesystem is mounted,
ruling out the possiblity of it being a module.
I contacted Amstrad about this over a week ago, but to date haven't had
a response.
J.
--
9 out of 10 men who tried Camels prefer women.