Re: Possible GPL Violation of Linux in Amstrad's E3 Videophone

[Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>]

On Sul, 2004-10-03 at 12:46, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> care, I did not do it. Just told the customer that if he wanted, he could
> have everything, but when he replies "no thanks", I have no motivation
> loosing my time. So from time to time, I put together new patches on my

Which meets the GPL file. Customer can also be expected to work "diff"
unless you are doing daft stuff like obfuscating existing code.

> As long as vendors are honnest, and respect their customers' rights, I
> don't see any problem. The problem arises when vendors explicitly refuse
> to open anything. But most of the time, I suspect it's just a matter of
> time and cleanness, and we should not expect too much from vendors who
> already acknowledge that they are using GPL software and that they are
> doing their best to publish the code ASAP.

On the little embedded box side there is certainly a lot of systematic
abuse, especially in asian originated products. (And I justify the
otherwise apparently racist remark with the statistics).

> > 	GPL v 2 blah bla 
> > 
> > 	or you may choose to distribute the software without source
> > 	code for $100,000 per product you ship it in.
> > 
> > This would then also give both a Judge and the thief a clear crystalised
> > value for damages....
> 
> Hmmm interesting clause which would make them think before they steal the
> code. Perhaps they would take more time to separate open and closed code
> then. The problem is to define whom this money should be sent to.

Well I was thinking the $100,000 would just be for the bits I wrote in
that one file or that one driver, ....

Alan