[License-discuss] License Question
Philippe Ombredanne
pombredanne at nexb.com
Thu Feb 16 08:48:25 UTC 2017
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
and ext> [...]
> The company selling the firmware does indeed bear the obligation to
> comply with the licensing terms of the various codebases it ships that
> were written by others, including the Linux kernel,
> [...]
> As a third party who is standing outside the commission of apparent
> torts against some copyright owners of code within the 'firmware' image,
> you have limited leverage, lacking standing for a copyright action.
> [...]
> I'm sure the above is not quite what you were hoping to hear, but I hope
> it proves enlightening, nonetheless.
Rick: This is enlightening and well written!
I guess other courses of action could include:
- getting advice from the FSF [1].
- in the past, discussing on gpl-violations [2] would have been an option,
but it looks mostly dormant nowadays and its mailing lists pages are 404.
- or if one feels strongly about the topic, public shaming?
[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.en.html
[2] http://gpl-violations.org
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list