[Arm-netbook] evaluating rk3188

[joem]

On Fri, 2013-08-02 at 15:22 +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 07:53:34PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Oliver Schinagl
> > <oliver+list at schinagl.nl> wrote:
> > 
> > >> Other than a few orgs like yours that's too small to interest them
> > >> they have no incentive.
> > >
> > > But are they violating the GPL? :)
> > 
> >  interesting question.  they've released kernel source (ok, it's out
> > there...) the thing is: will they force you to sign an NDA to get
> > kernel code.  the only thing is, they don't *have* to give you damn
> > squat.
> > 
> >  about the only way to quotes trick quotes them into that situation is
> > to say... receive binaries (not under NDA) and *then* ask for the
> > source code.  if they don't supply you the binaries, they don't have
> > to give you jack s**t.
> > 
> >  once you've signed the NDA you're screwed if they decide to violate
> > the GPL, but if they do that then so are they.
> 
> Luke,
> 
> That's a very misguided view of the way licensing works. Think about it
> in this terms: you license some code from company X that explicitly
> states in their agreement with you that you cannot distribute this code
> to anyone. Now, no matter what NDA you sign with a third party, you
> will be in violation of the original agreement unless that NDA pretty
> much states "you are one with us from a legal point of view."
> 
> What GPLv2 says is that once you have given the compiled code to any
> person (being that your own employee or a 3rd party) you are required to
> provide a way for that person to have access to the source code.
> 
> So, yes, they are in violation of GPL if they give you the binaries.
> The way they currently sidestep that issue is by giving the binaries
> to OEMs and make it their problem to distribute that to the public.


You can complain to China government, and they seem to have started
taking copyright violations and intellectual property
seriously since they joined the WTO.

They won't hesitate to cuff bosses of big companies
who show disrespect to government intentions,
but the question is whether anyone want GPL violators
to go out of business as a product of that complaint.

May be the way is to write to the companies
and tell them they are violating GPL, and they
must release the sources or drop the product.
And then add a whole lot of blurb about open
sourcing the stuff they are hiding and the benefits
of not hiding it and letting everybody build
on top of it to create more demand for their product.

Keep sending reminder letters benefit letters every 2 weeks.
After 1 month of no progress,
explain they are being going to get reported.

Big bosses of big companies are infinitely wise people.
They have lived longer and experienced much.
You should explain the problems in long form
as if addressing royalty, and explain in long form
what it is that you want. The less blunt, and more compromises that
are offered on the table, the more likely a compromise
will be found that is free of blame and face saving to all.


See that! Its looking more doable already!!