[Arm-netbook] $250 Dev Kit

[Gordan Bobic]

lkcl luke wrote:
> 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.

I like the sound of that. When are FSF filing a law suit? I'll certainly 
pitch in what few pennies I can spare toward that project. :)

Gordan