headers
Tomasz Sterna | 5 Feb 22:38
Favicon
Gravatar

Chineese tablets and phones manufacturers violating Linux kernel license

Hello.

Is there anything we can do about the fact, that virtually every Chinese
manufacturer building devices running Android (Tablets and Phones)
violates Linux kernel GPL?

Synrgic, Eanovo, Sidonia, Highton, Lianxintai, Ruyi and on, and on...

Even American companies, like Dell, linger with releasing the source to
they  devices. But Chinese ones just plainly ignore the GPL terms.

This is very frustrating.
One approach is discussed at: http://www.elpauer.org/?p=1146
Is there anything we could do?

--

-- 
Tomasz Sterna
Open Source Developer  http://www.xiaoka.com/portfolio
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
lkcl luke | 6 Feb 00:02
Picon

Re: Chineese tablets and phones manufacturers violating Linux kernel license

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Tomasz Sterna <tomek <at> xiaoka.com> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Is there anything we can do about the fact, that virtually every Chinese
> manufacturer building devices running Android (Tablets and Phones)
> violates Linux kernel GPL?
>
> Synrgic, Eanovo, Sidonia, Highton, Lianxintai, Ruyi and on, and on...
>
> Even American companies, like Dell, linger with releasing the source to
> they  devices. But Chinese ones just plainly ignore the GPL terms.
>
> This is very frustrating.
> One approach is discussed at: http://www.elpauer.org/?p=1146
> Is there anything we could do?

 *deep breath*.

 there's a company in bristol - i don't know who they are but i have a
friend who knows - who have worked out how to sue companies in China
for Copyright violations across International Boundaries.

 so it *can* be done, but don't for god's sake ask how much they
charge, or how long it takes.  or what the name of the legal firm is.
or for my friend's name.  or his email address.

 the problem that you have in China is that the PRC Govt normally only
takes up Copyright Violation cases for *Chinese Nationals*.  everyone
else can, as far as they're concerned, go f*** themselves.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Henrik Nordström | 6 Feb 08:34
Gravatar

Re: Chineese tablets and phones manufacturers violating Linux kernel license

sön 2012-02-05 klockan 23:02 +0000 skrev lkcl luke:

>  to successfully do that, and actually get any damages, however, you
> will *need* to have a "Copyright Registration Certificate".  it
> doesn't matter a damn that you're not even *from* the USA - you
> *still* need to go into a Town Hall in any town in any State of the
> United States, of which there are 51 to choose from (*1), and put in a
> lovely Certificate.

To further complicate matters most developers are not so interested in
getting damages or even compliance, but to educate on the benefit of
cooperating on open source. But getting damages is one way to educate..
just not sure it's a good way.

Regards
Henrik
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
hatter | 16 Feb 12:12

RE: Huawei E5 GPL violation?

Hi,

I wanted to follow up on a query that I found with Google:

http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/legal/2010-July/002155.html

I realize that this is an almost 2 year old post and I'm sorry to bring it
up if for some reason the issue is no longer relevant.

I own a Huawei e5830 wireless modem device and I found that it indeed runs
the Linux kernel 2.6.25, busybox v1.10.4, dnsmasq version 2.45, and
iptables v1.2.11. So far I haven't been able to find the source code for
the software installed on the device.

The message thread seems to end with an unanswered question about the full
steps to reproduce how to determine this. I determined this by telnetting
into the router. By default, telnet access is disabled, so in order to
access the command line interface it needs to be re-enabled. Here's how I
did it:

1. Connect to the router using wifi and log in to its web interface 2.
Type in the following address in the address bar:
http://192.168.1.1/en/nvram_operate.asp (by default 192.168.1.1 is the
router's ip address)
3. Backup the router's settings by clicking "Save NVRAM to File".
4. Use a text editor (I used vim) to find NV_FW_LOCAL_TELNET_ENABLED_I and
change "<member>unsigned char enable=0;" to "<member>unsigned char
enable=1;"
5. Upload the changed nvram file using the same web interface page
(http://192.168.1.1/en/nvram_operate.asp)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Felix Schwarz | 16 Feb 14:30
Picon

Grandstream does not provide source code for GXP2100 ip phone

Hi,

I own a GXP2100 IP phone from Grandstream.

The device runs Linux [1]. Neither the shipped package nor the web site
contain any reference to the GPL/source codes.

I wrote an inquiry to their customer support and they responded:
"Unfortunately, we don't provide the source code of our firmware to customers."

- Does anyone know if that was just an incompetent support agent?
- Is there any action already underway against Grandstream?
- I suppose gpl-violations.org is too busy to take on yet another case. Are
  there any kernel-related copyright holders willing to pick up on that one?
  I assume one could get help from the Software Freedom Law Center as long
  there is a copyright-holder behind the request.

fs

[1] you can get a basic shell via telnet:
GXP2100> dmesg
Linux version 2.6.26.5 (sfrick <at> sfrick-hp.site) (gcc version 4.1.2) #103
PREEMPT Mon Dec 5 16:54:05 CST 2011
...
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Armijn Hemel | 16 Feb 15:37

Re: Grandstream does not provide source code for GXP2100 ip phone

On 02/16/2012 02:30 PM, Felix Schwarz wrote:
> - I suppose gpl-violations.org is too busy to take on yet another case. Are
>    there any kernel-related copyright holders willing to pick up on that one?
Where did you get that idea? :S

armijn

--

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      armijn <at> gpl-violations.org || http://www.gpl-violations.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Felix Schwarz | 16 Feb 16:25
Picon

Re: Grandstream does not provide source code for GXP2100 ip phone


Am 16.02.2012 15:37, schrieb Armijn Hemel:
> On 02/16/2012 02:30 PM, Felix Schwarz wrote:
>> - I suppose gpl-violations.org is too busy to take on yet another case. Are
>>    there any kernel-related copyright holders willing to pick up on that one?
> Where did you get that idea? :S

https://lwn.net/Articles/478773/
laf0rge: "But yes, the project is up and running and we've been doing
enforcement all the time along. There's a maximum cap of 10 cases in parallel
at this time, to not stretch the thin resources even thinner."

As you apparantly don't have enough time to write even a yearly report, I
assumed that you probably hit that 10 cases cap :-)

However I'd be more than happy if gpl-violations would go for the enforcement
here.

fs
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Henrik Nordström | 17 Feb 01:36
Gravatar

RE: Huawei E5 GPL violation?

tor 2012-02-16 klockan 15:12 +0400 skrev hatter <at> lavabit.com:

> I own a Huawei e5830 wireless modem device and I found that it indeed runs
> the Linux kernel 2.6.25, busybox v1.10.4, dnsmasq version 2.45, and
> iptables v1.2.11. So far I haven't been able to find the source code for
> the software installed on the device.

A quick google search indicates that Huawei have published some sources
in their forum, but seems it's no longer available

http://blog.knecht-ruprecht.info/2010/01/quellcodesource-code-des-huawei-e5.html

http://forum.huawei.com/jive4/thread.jspa?threadID=330822&tstart=50&orderStr=9

and some other references.

Regards
Henrik
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Oliver Schinagl | 23 Feb 10:57
Picon

Validity GPL kernel module and its source

Hi list,

I have obtained (legally from the net) a source tarball of a dvb-t 
driver. Most source files list no name and no author, some list an 
author and some list 'a' copyright notice, without a license.

The entire module however is very specifically licensed GPL: 
'MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");' is written in the driver. Some bits.

I don't recall the validity of copyright on headers, but some state as 
mentioned no license, just 'Copyright 2004 Afatech, Inc. All rights 
reserved.'

Personally I would think, since the module itself is copyrighted GPL, so 
must be all the source to generate this code. I bet getting intouch with 
the copyright holder and cleanup the sources to specifically mention 
proper copyright is near impossible, as it's all old and dated and 
getting in touch with companies like these tend to be difficult.

What is your take on this?

The git repository for this driver can  be found 
http://git.schinagl.nl/AF903x_SRC.git
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Armijn Hemel | 23 Feb 11:26

Re: Validity GPL kernel module and its source

hi,

>
> I don't recall the validity of copyright on headers, but some state as 
> mentioned no license, just 'Copyright 2004 Afatech, Inc. All rights 
> reserved.'
>
> Personally I would think, since the module itself is copyrighted GPL, 
> so must be all the source to generate this code. I bet getting intouch 
> with the copyright holder and cleanup the sources to specifically 
> mention proper copyright is near impossible, as it's all old and dated 
> and getting in touch with companies like these tend to be difficult.
>
> What is your take on this?

Source code is not automatically made GPL licensed (or compatible) 
because it links with GPL code. The only thing you can conclude is that 
a binary generated from these sources cannot be distributed license 
compliant. No more, no less.

>
> The git repository for this driver can  be found 
> http://git.schinagl.nl/AF903x_SRC.git
>

So that means you are distributing someone else's proprietary source 
code. I wouldn't do that until the license issue is resolved.

armijn
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane