Is Sony violating Linux GPL?

Is Sony violating Linux GPL?

[Salvador Fandino]

Hi,

A couple of months ago I bought a Sony Vaio VGN-TX50B. It comes with an
embedded version of Linux used to run a multimedia player (InterVideo
InstantON) without booting the main OS.

A booklet containing a copy of the GPL and other free licenses was
included on the laptop package. A note on the same booklet pointed to
http://www.sony.net/Products/Linux/Download/search.html as the place
were the GPL'ed software could be downloaded.

My laptop has a couple of ports for SD and a MagicGate memories not
supported by Linux, but that are usable from the multimedia player and
so that have to be supported by the custom kernel included on the
laptop. I downloaded the kernel package available from the Sony website
expecting to found the source code for the drivers there, but after
closer examination, I found it was an unmodified copy of the Linux sources.

Then I started mailing Vaio technical support (support@vaio-link.com),
asking for the drivers source code, and after several mails they just
refused to give me the drivers source code because "These drivers are
directly delivered to us by the manufacturers of the hardware and
modified by us and therefore we are not obliged to supply any source
code for these drivers".

I am not an expert on Linux internals but I doubt a driver for this kind
of device could be developed independently enough of the kernel to not
be considered a derived work, so is Sony violating the Linux license?


lspci -v

0000:06:05.3 Mass storage controller: Texas Instruments PCIxx21
Integrated FlashMedia Controller
        Subsystem: Sony Corporation: Unknown device 81e2
        Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 57, IRQ 10
        Memory at b0104000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8K]
        Capabilities: [44] Power Management version 2


Cheers,

  - Salvador

Re: Is Sony violating Linux GPL?

[Ben Collins]

On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:22 +0100, Salvador Fandino wrote:
> Then I started mailing Vaio technical support (support@vaio-link.com),
> asking for the drivers source code, and after several mails they just
> refused to give me the drivers source code because "These drivers are
> directly delivered to us by the manufacturers of the hardware and
> modified by us and therefore we are not obliged to supply any source
> code for these drivers".
> 
> I am not an expert on Linux internals but I doubt a driver for this kind
> of device could be developed independently enough of the kernel to not
> be considered a derived work, so is Sony violating the Linux license?

They are correct. The deal with modules is they don't have to GPL them.

It's also not entirely impossible for them to use stock kernel source to
build a simple boot system for just a media player.

What would be nice is if Sony or someone would push this hardware
manufacturer to open up their drivers.

-- 
   Ben Collins <ben.collins@ubuntu.com>
   Developer
   Ubuntu Linux

Re: Is Sony violating Linux GPL?

[Alan Cox]

On Llu, 2006-01-09 at 08:57 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > of device could be developed independently enough of the kernel to not
> > be considered a derived work, so is Sony violating the Linux license?
> 
> They are correct. The deal with modules is they don't have to GPL them.

There is no such "deal". Whether Sony is violating the license is a
matter of interpretation of the boundary lines that in law define a
"derived work". Nothing else.

Many of the Linux kernel copyright holders (including the FSF) are of
opinions that some or indeed all kernel modules are derivative works.
There is currently no directly relevant legal test case to assertain
this reliably.

At the moment the bigger concern however is not legal corner cases but
the huge number of vendors directly violating the GPL.

Alan

Re: Is Sony violating Linux GPL?

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 08:57 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:22 +0100, Salvador Fandino wrote:
> > Then I started mailing Vaio technical support (support@vaio-link.com),
> > asking for the drivers source code, and after several mails they just
> > refused to give me the drivers source code because "These drivers are
> > directly delivered to us by the manufacturers of the hardware and
> > modified by us and therefore we are not obliged to supply any source
> > code for these drivers".
> > 
> > I am not an expert on Linux internals but I doubt a driver for this kind
> > of device could be developed independently enough of the kernel to not
> > be considered a derived work, so is Sony violating the Linux license?
> 
> They are correct. The deal with modules is they don't have to GPL them.

there is no such agreement or deal. There is no exception to the GPL in
this regard at all (but yes that's a semi common misconception/excuse
used by binary driver people)