Re: [gnu.org #214016] GPL Violation of 'sveasoft' with GPL Linux Kernel/Busybox + code
From: Shawn Starr via RT
Date: Tue Nov 09 2004 - 10:29:50 EST
They won't be distributing the source because of their new
anti-distribution methods, they aren't providing the source because they
don't want people to distribute the binaries any more either or know now the
anti-distribution mechanism will work (which requires the user to enter a
value to unlock the binary firmware and send a request to their servers).
It is this action that they are violating the GPL and that needs to be
If they want to relicense their changes they need to not use GPL existing code
which they are not doing. They have not added written any of this code from
scratch and thus must distribute the source on request to those who get the
binaries which they are not doing anymore.
What was true before of redistribution and being kicked out of the program is
now not happening anymore as there is no code to distribute of the resulting
On November 9, 2004 07:07, Alan Cox via RT wrote:
> On Maw, 2004-11-09 at 00:11, novalis@xxxxxxx via RT wrote:
> > But if you distribute binaries, you must either include or offer source
> > code. Do they do this? What software do they include that FSF holds
> > copyright on? Where can I check this?
> > Do they include a copy of the GPL with the software?
> They include the GPL, they include the source nothing I can find they do
> violates the GPL. They do appear to annoy a few people because their
> policy is that while you may join their early access process and get
> source if you redistribute that source then you get kicked off their
> program, but you are still allowed to distribute that source.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/