From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262321AbTFJD5l (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2003 23:57:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262323AbTFJD5l (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2003 23:57:41 -0400 Received: from mailout.fastq.com ([204.62.193.66]:57867 "EHLO mailout.fastq.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262321AbTFJD5k (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2003 23:57:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL From: Russ Dill Reply-To: Russ.Dill@asu.edu To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: gilbertd@treblig.org Message-Id: <1055218293.3630.171.camel@russ> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.3.92 (Preview Release) Date: 09 Jun 2003 21:11:34 -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I suggest taking this slowly; just like no one here would like a bunch > of lawyers breathing down their necks for something I'm sure their > guys won't either - and that should probably be a last resort after > people have tried a few friendlier contacts. its clear from Andrew Miklas original email that this has been tried. (although a second chance wouldn't hurt). However, if this was a company distributing unlicensed sofware from a company that makes their living selling software (Microsoft, Id, Symantec, Oracle, etc) I can assure you that they would not be let off with a warning. > In the case of busybox I guess they are just using a standard > unmodified one; so in principal all they really missing is an > acknowledgment pointing to its home page. You guess? how can you know? What unreleased bug fixes could be lurking inside? You don't know unless you have the source. This point is mute, because a) it violates busybox's copyright, and b) another GPL program included (udhcp) is most definately modified. > In the case of the kernel do we know they've actually made any > modifications at all? Or is it just a standard distribution from > someone else? Perhaps they've contributed changes back? Well, they have nothing to lose by sending us their kernel source tree, do they? -- Russ Dill