Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 14:01:35 +0200
From: Pierre Michon <pierre@no-spam.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: freebox possible GPL violation
Message-ID: <20051006120135.GA1002@linux.ensimag.fr>
Reply-To: 4344F39B.10806@cs.aau.dk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1526
Lines: 39

Hi,

>I might have misunderstood but I think that if you buy the hardware you
>cannot connect it to the DSLAM network anymore. So that only the boxes
>they own are connected to the DSLAM.

Again have you any proof that there aren't any Linux firmware in the
flash of the freebox ?
How do you explain that the boot sequence isn't stateless ?
Why in case of a firmware update, you have a special state of 10 seconds
were the freebox seem to download and write some data somewhere ?

So yes may be you can't connect anymore to the free DSLAM, but there is
may be still GPL data in the flash.

>Are you sure this point has been clarified in court in the past ?
>If not, I would bet on it (for the specific case of settop boxes).

For french law I don't know, but someone on gpl-violation this is true
for de and au.

>I mentioned in another mail the case of a mobile phone network
>infrastructure where the network nodes to which mobile phones are
>connecting are running Linux. It seems to be an "internal use" (as it
>never leak out of the company network) and yet providing a service to
>customers.

No the freebox is more like a dvb box that is lended by a satellite
provider and could do firmware update via satellite.

I don't know if there are similar case for dvb box.


Pierre
-
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/