Subject: Re: Possible GPL Violation
From: Carlos Silva <r3pek@r3pek.homelinux.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <yw1x1x7olq87.fsf@ford.inprovide.com>
References: <1117459153.12693.10.camel@localhost>
	 <yw1xis10lt69.fsf@ford.inprovide.com> <1117462302.12693.15.camel@localhost>
	 <yw1x1x7olq87.fsf@ford.inprovide.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 16:19:42 +0100
Message-Id: <1117466382.12693.19.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2450
Lines: 51

On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 16:53 +0200, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> 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 don't think that's the way to go... i aslready asked them in kindly
and harsher tone, so it's a dead end here.

> 
> >> > 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 tappreciatedhat take
> the "freedom" thing most seriously.  Maybe you can get some ideas from
> the debian-legal list.
> 
Probably they can point me to somewhere, but if someone in here knows
what should be done, i'll be appreciated.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/