[Arm-netbook] $250 Dev Kit

[lkcl luke]

On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Philip Hands <phil at hands.com> wrote:

> Perhaps one of the bigger repeat offenders needs to be got to the point
> where it's established as a point of fact that they are in violation,
> and as such no longer have any distribution rights under the GPL, and
> then just trash all their products whenever they hit a western market.
>
> Of course, they'll then comply instantly, and it always seems somewhat
> churlish to refuse them readmittance to the fold after that.  That's why
> the headline case with the press photo of a customs man taking a
> sledge-hammer to a shiny new toy never quite happens.

 well the problem is that if it's linux kernel GPL compliance, that's
game over for them, right there.  you imagine trying to ask 1,000+
copyright holders for permission to reinstate their rights...

 ... it's not going to happen, is it?  apart from anything, many
people have moved on from their old company / email address.

this is rather unfortunate, because it's basically a death sentence
for any company, to take them on.  but, maybe that's what's needed.

 if so, i know the perfect SoC company to do that to.  they have the
worst of both worlds, because they started off as a China-based
GPL-violating company and got bought by a USA-based company who then
put litigous paranoid lawyers on top of _that_ mess, who then lied to
me about their willingness to sort out their GPL-violating NDA.

taking out an entire SoC vendor because they are operating as a
criminal organisation because of software piracy and copyright
violation might just get the message across not to fuck with the GPL.
at least that's the theory, anyway.

l.