On Saturday 04 June 2005 20:47, Peter wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2005, Matan Ziv-Av wrote:
> > If you commercially distribute a binary created from a GPL source to
> > someone, you must either include a copy of the source (3a) or a written
> > offer to provide the source (3b).
> Or you must make it available to the user on request. On your website,
> or someone else's.
1. Peter you forgot that in any case a copy of the LICENSE is required
to be *provided* to the user (so he knows his rights). I just looked in
the provided manual and there is no mention of it -- just the usual
blurb about the rights of said company. A quick look at the
product page on the company site hasn't shown up any mention either.
2. You are missleading. Of course they may point you to any web site they
want but they didn't point to *any* web site for the source.
As Matan correctly quoted -- the company must provide a *written*
offer (valid for at least 3 years) to provide this source -- it's
the company responsibility to provide the user with this details.
> There are many examples of kernel modules that provide support for
> modems, network drivers and other devices, which are NOT open source
> and NOT 'aggregations'.
But judge, there are many who break the law, I *cannot* be guilty...
> If you don't want to make your 802.11g wireless card work -
Good that you brought that example -- check your facts:
1. Head on to http://www.linksys.com/splash/54g_splash.asp
2. Press the "support" link
3. Look carefully at the GPL notice and start reading
Cisco (after buying Linksys) had to clean up the errors of their
predecessors.
> And to top it all, you do not own the router, it is rented. So you are a
> 'user' and have no rights on the hardware or software in it, nor has
> anyone an obligation to show you, as a user, anything.
Hmmm... the one who distribute it (Bezeq) should have a valid license
for the code and must be able to provide it.
> It's nice enough
> they did not hide the ssh, ftp and telnet interfaces, or alter the
> kernel /proc filesystem to hide its origins. I.e. they repect the IP.
Hiding is very bad strategy when you violate copyright law:
http://gpl-violations.org/news/20050414-fortinet-injunction.html
BTW: AFAIK in the US the difference between unknowingly violating
someones copyrights and *knowingly* infringing is the difference
between a maximum 150,000 $ per infrigment and a maximum 5 years
in jail.
> Would you expect to be able to see the source code of the interacting
> application in an ATM banking machine if it runs linux inside ? Want to
> bet that qualified Bezeq service personnel have manufacturer contacts
> and source access if they need it ?
Did anyone say that the ATM source was derived from GPL'ed code? Why
give false examples when a concrete case is shown?
> Axis single chip embedded linux (is that *bundling*) or not ?
Funny you mention them, Axis port of the Linux kernel to their
architecture is now an official part of Linux kernel for some time
(the "cris" architecture) -- was this example meant to show contribution
of companies to Linux or something else -- I'm puzzled.
We did see violations of GPL by large and small companies. We are not
completely *sure* that this case is a violation:
- We first need to check our facts thoroughly.
- Than think how to approach this -- Generally I do like the FSF
way of handling these things -- trying to resolv these issues
peacefully with the company lawyers (e.g: Cisco case). As we
all witnessed though, sometimes a "Harald Welte" type of action is
needed:
http://gpl-violations.org/about.html
Cheers,
--
Oron Peled Voice/Fax: +972-4-8228492
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.actcom.co.il/~oron
ICQ UIN: 16527398
"When you understand UNIX, you will understand the world.
When you understand NT....you will understand NT" - Richard Thieme
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
