Doesn't providing software as a download count as distribution? They distributed the software in question a few days ago to me via a direct download from their own website linksys.com (firmware bin). I would agree if it was a 3rd party distributing the firmware but it is not.
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Thomas Charron <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 7:26 AM, James Hilliard <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> The software contained on the router when sold appears to be irrelevant >> for this particular case, and they do appear to provide GPL license >> information at least on their PDF manuals, although they often provide >> these whether or not the routers actually contain GPL code. Providing for >> download on their website the full software image(often not the same as >> provided on the router itself) appears to be the point of contention and in >> my reading of the GPL they are obligated to provide GPL source of those >> images for 3 years of distribution from their website as well. So even if >> the make a router EOL if they leave the firmware images up they still have >> to comply with the GPL in regards to those right? They did seem to have GPL >> notices posted more or less properly but when asked for the source to those >> downloads they pulled the images and refused source for a number of them >> using EOL as justification. Oddly enough they still appear to be working on >> getting source to the first one I contested. >> > > They're not doing anything fishy here, really, IMHO. And it gets back > down into the nitty gritty of distribution. The written offer is good for > three years from the last time they distributed it. If it was not, then > the three years would be meaningless, as it would turn into an indefinite > requirement so long as *ANYONE ANYWHERE* downloaded it from ANYPLACE IT > MIGHT EXIST at least one every three years. > > They made the offer per the GPL, and need to ensure it is available for > three years from the date of that original offer. > > -- > -- Thomas >
