All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-07-18 23:48 root
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: root @ 2003-07-18 23:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

[FYI: Please cc: me; I'm not on lkml, thanks.]
                                                                               
On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 10:41:23PM -0400, Andrew Miklas wrote:
> However, I have gone through all the available information on the Linksys
> website, and can find no reference to the GPL, Linux (as it relates to
> this product), or the firmware source code. Also, the firmware binary
> (see below) is freely available from their website. There is no link
> from the download page to the source, or any mention of Linux or the GPL.

[snip]

> few of the newer 802.11b and (nearly?) all 802.11g chips. Incidentally,
> Linux has excellent support for at least one manufacturer's wireless family.
> The following Broadcom chips all appear to be supported under Linux -- if you
> happen to be running Linux on a MIPS processor in a Linksys router:
>
> Broadcom BCM4301 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4307 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11a Controller
> Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11 Multiband Controller
> Broadcom BCM4310 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11b/g Controller
> Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11a Controller                                 
> Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11 Multiband Controller
>
> This list was produced by running strings on:
> lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/net/wl/wl.o
>

[much discussion]

On Maw, 2003-07-08 at 12:30, Matthew Hall wrote:
> Hi lkml,
> I don't know if anyone's noticed, but Linksys have opened up and
> released their code.
> 
> http://www.linksys.com/support/gpl.asp

Remember the reason we were poking around inside the Linksys firmware? --
for Broadcom 11g support! Well, I've searched the WRT54G firmware 1.30.1
package kernel-2.4.5.tgz (linked at the above URL) and this is what I found:

<begin terminal output>
$ head -267 linux/arch/mips/Makefile | tail -11
                                                                               
#
# Broadcom BCM93725 variants
#
ifdef CONFIG_BCM93725
LIBS          += arch/mips/brcm-boards/bcm93725/bcm93725.o arch/mips/brcm-boards/generic/brcm.o
SUBDIRS       += arch/mips/brcm-boards/generic arch/mips/brcm-boards/bcm93725
LOADADDR      += 0x80000000
TEXTADDR      += 0x80001000
endif

$ find linux/ /fw_cramfs -ipath "*bcm9*" -o -ipath "*brcm-*" -o -name "diag.*" -o -name "et.*" -o -name "il.*" -o -name "*writemac*" -o -name "*wl.*"
/fw_cramfs/lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/net/diag/diag.o
/fw_cramfs/lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/net/et/et.o
/fw_cramfs/lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/net/mac/writemac.o
/fw_cramfs/lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/net/wl/wl.o
<end>

The Linksys kernel source tree seems to omit code for the Broadcom drivers,
the libraries which the build links against, and the resulting modules! Is
this allowed by the GPL? It seems Linksys has omitted (at least) one crucial   
part of their kernel source....

True, Linksys deserves much credit for releasing their GPL-derived
source -- but can someone legally write a module or kernel library for a
GPL kernel and provide its recipient with neither the source nor library?

 -- Michael English


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2021-01-17 17:51 nipponmail
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: nipponmail @ 2021-01-17 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Linus etc do not give a FUCK that Grsecurity is BLATANTLY violating the 
GPL. So why do you fucking retards complain about this?
> DURR BECUAUSE WE DON'T HAVE 2 DO ANYTHING, CAN JUST COMMISERATE

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* RE: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-11 19:22                 ` Adrian Bunk
@ 2003-06-11 20:12                   ` David Schwartz
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: David Schwartz @ 2003-06-11 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Adrian Bunk, Randolph Bentson; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List


> On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:39:36AM -0700, Randolph Bentson wrote:

> >...
> > If the distributor elects to distribute the object code or executable
> > form under clause 3b, one might reasonably argue that the distributor
> > need only distribute the source to those third parties in possession
> > of the written offer which must be included.  Others may argue that
> >...

> "Accompany it with a written offer, ..., to give any third party, ..., a
> complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code..."
>
> This is non-ambiguous. You might _not_ "reasonably argue" about it, the
> "any third party" leaves no room for other interpretations.
>
> > Randolph Bentson
>
> cu
> Adrian

	Think about this logically. Suppose a company releases a product and
(maybe) accompanies it with such a written offer (I mean, how could you know
for sure if you hadn't seen it?). You call the company up to try to enforce
the offer. They say, "What offer?" You say, "the written offer that
accompanied some copies of your product." You can't cite the text of the
written offer, you can't specify any specific person they made the offer to.

	It is totally reasonable to construe "any third party" to mean that the
offer can't specify that it's only vaild for certain particular individuals.
In fact, I always understood simply to mean that you couldn't limit the
offer to only the purchaser (assuming the product was sold).

	What would the purpose be of a "written offer" (and why would you have to
"accompany" the object code with it?) if not that the offer is an
enforceable 'coupon'? Why wouldn't the GPL just say that you have to
"provide any third party with a complete machine-readable copy of the
corresponding source code". Why specify a written offer if it just meant
that you had to offer it?

	DS



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-11 17:39               ` Randolph Bentson
@ 2003-06-11 19:22                 ` Adrian Bunk
  2003-06-11 20:12                   ` David Schwartz
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2003-06-11 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Randolph Bentson; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:39:36AM -0700, Randolph Bentson wrote:
>...
> If the distributor elects to distribute the object code or executable
> form under clause 3b, one might reasonably argue that the distributor
> need only distribute the source to those third parties in possession
> of the written offer which must be included.  Others may argue that
>...

"Accompany it with a written offer, ..., to give any third party, ..., a 
complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code..."

This is non-ambiguous. You might _not_ "reasonably argue" about it, the 
"any third party" leaves no room for other interpretations.

> Randolph Bentson

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-11 15:38             ` Adrian Bunk
@ 2003-06-11 17:39               ` Randolph Bentson
  2003-06-11 19:22                 ` Adrian Bunk
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Randolph Bentson @ 2003-06-11 17:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 05:38:45PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> You definitely don't need physical possession of the written offer.
> Otherwise 3c wouldn't work.

You cannot mix the terms of clauses 3a, 3b, and 3c.  The "written
offer" is only an element of clause 3b.

A significant point which seems to be glossed over is that the
distributor is the entity which selects which of these clauses,
3a, 3b, or 3c, is to be exercised to satisfy the GPL.  Each places
a different obligation on the distributor.

If the distributor elects to distribute the object code or executable
form under clause 3a, the distributor need only distribute copies of
the source to the recipients of the object code or executable form.

If the distributor elects to distribute the object code or executable
form under clause 3b, one might reasonably argue that the distributor
need only distribute the source to those third parties in possession
of the written offer which must be included.  Others may argue that
this clause requires that the distributor make the source available
to everyone, but even then the distributor is not obliged to put it
on the web and the distributor may charge for the distribution cost.

If the distributor elects to distribute the object code or executable
form under clause 3c, and is qualified to do so, the distributor
need only distribute the information to those who receive the object
code or executable form.  The distributor is not obliged to give
this information to everyone.

Of course, once anyone has a copy of this source, it may be further
distributed under sections 1, 2, or 3.


I'd like to see Linksys elect to distribute under clause 3b by putting
a note in each box with a pointer to source files which everyone
can fetch from their web site.  (I believe that web based distribution
qualifies as "a medium customarily used for software interchange"
cited in 3b and that they can simply absorb the cost of this method
of distribution.)  Recent news suggests that this will be the case.
Let's hope that they, and other such distributors of embedded GPL
based systems, follow this course.

--
Randolph Bentson
bentson@holmsjoen.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-10 20:17           ` Randolph Bentson
@ 2003-06-11 15:38             ` Adrian Bunk
  2003-06-11 17:39               ` Randolph Bentson
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2003-06-11 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Randolph Bentson; +Cc: David Schwartz, Alan Cox, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 01:17:30PM -0700, Randolph Bentson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 12:21:41AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 02:50:11PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> > > As I read 3b, it only applies if the person requesting the source
> > > code actually has physical possession of the written offer. (Though
> > > the offer could be transferred to anyone.)
> > 
> > "to give any third party" in 3b is pretty non-ambiguous.
> 
> You've skipped the qualifing predicate condition.  Every clause
> of section 3 begins with "Accompany it with", referring to the
> distribution of the Program in object code or executable form.

You definitely don't need physical possession of the written offer. 
Otherwise 3c wouldn't work.

> Randolph Bentson

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-10 22:47     ` Andrew Miklas
  2003-06-11 12:42       ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-06-11 14:28       ` Kent Borg
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Kent Borg @ 2003-06-11 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Miklas; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 06:47:39PM -0400, Andrew Miklas wrote:
> I'm pleased to report that Linksys has noticed the activity here and is now in 
> the process of determining what must be released under the GPL.  I will keep 
> this list updated on what I receive.

Cool!


-kb, the Kent who is pleased the GPL is building this kind of
precedence as it will maybe make the eventual legal defence of the GPL
a smidge easier, also the Kent who looks like he will finally be
buying a home wireless access point--and it looks like it will be a
Linksys (are the other Linksys boxes going to be opened?).

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-10 22:47     ` Andrew Miklas
@ 2003-06-11 12:42       ` Alan Cox
  2003-06-11 14:28       ` Kent Borg
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-11 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: public; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Maw, 2003-06-10 at 23:47, Andrew Miklas wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm pleased to report that Linksys has noticed the activity here and is now in 
> the process of determining what must be released under the GPL.  I will keep 
> this list updated on what I receive.
> 
> My current contact within Linksys also noted that the company has a long 
> tradition of support for Linux.  Previously, they have shipped CDs containing 
> GPL'd source with their networking products.  I'm told the lack of source for 
> the WRT54G was not intentional and is an isolated incident.

Thats good news.  Thanks for bugging your contacts


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09 22:37   ` Daniel Phillips
@ 2003-06-10 22:47     ` Andrew Miklas
  2003-06-11 12:42       ` Alan Cox
  2003-06-11 14:28       ` Kent Borg
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Miklas @ 2003-06-10 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hi,

I'm pleased to report that Linksys has noticed the activity here and is now in 
the process of determining what must be released under the GPL.  I will keep 
this list updated on what I receive.

My current contact within Linksys also noted that the company has a long 
tradition of support for Linux.  Previously, they have shipped CDs containing 
GPL'd source with their networking products.  I'm told the lack of source for 
the WRT54G was not intentional and is an isolated incident.

If anyone has any material that they want me to forward on to the people at 
Linksys, please drop me a line at this address.



-- Andrew

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  0:19 ` Oliver M. Bolzer
  2003-06-09  0:31   ` Jeff
@ 2003-06-10 20:43   ` Michael Neuffer
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Michael Neuffer @ 2003-06-10 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Oliver M. Bolzer; +Cc: linux-kernel

Quoting Oliver M. Bolzer (oliver@gol.com):
> [...]
> I directly called the PR guy responsible for that line of products at their
> headquater (good to be on their list of press) and explained the situation
> to him. He promised to clear it up with legal and the developers.
> After about a week (and me ranting about an anonymous company in my blog)
> he got back with a very detailed and polite answer about the situation.
> They DID know about the issues involved and their obligations. Just that
> their other hand (like support and web page creation) isn't up to the
> "new" style and that they were fixing it. I also found out, that the
> "quick setup" leaflet in the product actually contained a small note
> that the product included GPLed software. 
> 
> It has been 3 month since. If they havn't gotten their act together 
> still, they need to be reminded of it.
> 

Over a month ago I send them a request and this is their response:

--------------------------------------------------------------
>From daveh@buffalotech.com  Fri Apr 25 20:04:28 2003
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 08:52:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Linux & WLI-CB-G54
From: Dave Howell <daveh@buffalotech.com>
To: Michael Neuffer <neuffer@neuffer.info>

Michael,

Thank you for your interest in Buffalo's wireless products.
At this time, Buffalo does not support Linux for our wireless products.
We are working with our chip mfg on this issue and should have working Linux
drivers in the future but we cannot say when.

Keep posted to our website for the latest information.

Regards,

Dave Howell
Buffalo Technology USA

U.S. Technical Support is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.   
Consumers call: 866-752-6210
Resellers call: 877-424-6355

------------------------------------------------------------------

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09 22:21         ` Adrian Bunk
@ 2003-06-10 20:17           ` Randolph Bentson
  2003-06-11 15:38             ` Adrian Bunk
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Randolph Bentson @ 2003-06-10 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: David Schwartz, Alan Cox, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 12:21:41AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 02:50:11PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> > As I read 3b, it only applies if the person requesting the source
> > code actually has physical possession of the written offer. (Though
> > the offer could be transferred to anyone.)
> 
> "to give any third party" in 3b is pretty non-ambiguous.

You've skipped the qualifing predicate condition.  Every clause
of section 3 begins with "Accompany it with", referring to the
distribution of the Program in object code or executable form.

-- 
Randolph Bentson
bentson@holmsjoen.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-10  4:11 Russ Dill
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Russ Dill @ 2003-06-10  4:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel; +Cc: gilbertd

> 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 <Russ.Dill@asu.edu>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 19:44 ` Colm MacCárthaigh
  2003-06-08 20:14   ` Jörn Engel
  2003-06-08 21:47   ` Russell King
@ 2003-06-09 22:37   ` Daniel Phillips
  2003-06-10 22:47     ` Andrew Miklas
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Phillips @ 2003-06-09 22:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Colm MacCárthaigh, Andrew Miklas; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sunday 08 June 2003 21:44, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
> Dell now ship a copy of the source and the license on the CD that
> comes with the TrueMobile kit. I really have to make clear here,
> Dell did amazingly well, they researched it, kept me informed,
> responded positively, and rectified procedures. It's a great example
> of how to do it right.
>
> So, I don't know what the linksys situation is fully, but I do hope
> that this report may help you in that it gives an example of a
> near-identical situation having been resolved successfully in the past.

In the hopes that somebody from Linksys is reading this thread, I'll add my 
$0.02.  I have one of these routers.  I'd buy a second instantly, if only I 
could build the firmware and fix some bugs in it.  I love the overall 
concept, but the buggy html interface is more than a little annoying.

Furthermore, I can think of a lot of uses for this little box, other than just 
a router.  If I had the source, I'd try some out, and if the results turned 
out as well expected, I'd make that public.  It's hard to see how this would 
be bad for Linksys.

Regards,

Daniel


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09 21:50       ` David Schwartz
@ 2003-06-09 22:21         ` Adrian Bunk
  2003-06-10 20:17           ` Randolph Bentson
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2003-06-09 22:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Schwartz; +Cc: Alan Cox, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 02:50:11PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> 
> > If he chooses 3b ("written offer, valid for at least three years, to
> > give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically
> > performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the
> > corresponding source code") he has to give it to everyone.
> 
> 	As I read 3b, it only applies if the person requesting the source code
> actually has physical possession of the written offer. (Though the offer
> could be transferred to anyone.)

"to give any third party" in 3b is pretty non-ambiguous.

> > > In Linksys case dumping the required source on the end of the CD of
> > > goodies that comes with the kit and including a notice would be
> > > sufficient.
> 
> > Yup.
> 
> 	No, it would not be. They also distribute the software from their web page,
> and that distribution must also be accompanied by source code or a written
> offer.

I missed the fact they make it available at their web page.

> 	DS

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* RE: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09 21:33     ` Adrian Bunk
@ 2003-06-09 21:50       ` David Schwartz
  2003-06-09 22:21         ` Adrian Bunk
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: David Schwartz @ 2003-06-09 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Adrian Bunk, Alan Cox; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List


> If he chooses 3b ("written offer, valid for at least three years, to
> give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically
> performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the
> corresponding source code") he has to give it to everyone.

	As I read 3b, it only applies if the person requesting the source code
actually has physical possession of the written offer. (Though the offer
could be transferred to anyone.)

> > In Linksys case dumping the required source on the end of the CD of
> > goodies that comes with the kit and including a notice would be
> > sufficient.

> Yup.

	No, it would not be. They also distribute the software from their web page,
and that distribution must also be accompanied by source code or a written
offer.

	DS



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  5:47   ` Frank Cusack
  2003-06-09 16:53     ` David Schwartz
  2003-06-09 18:25     ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-06-09 21:37     ` Adrian Bunk
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2003-06-09 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frank Cusack; +Cc: David Schwartz, public, linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 10:47:27PM -0700, Frank Cusack wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 10:32:52PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> > Including the source with the product would be insufficient to meet the GPL
> > requirements. They would have to offer the source (or a written offer to
> > obtain the source for no more than the cost of physically copying it) to
> > everyone who downloaded their software from their web site. The GPL is quite
> > clear that the source code offer must be made to anyone to whom the object
> > code is distributed. (The program must be accompanied by the offer.)
> 
> No, a source code *offer* must be made to anyone, period.

Wrong.

> Section 3(b) of GPLv2 says "Accompany it with a written offer ...  to give
> any third party ... [the] source code".
>...

If you read section 3 from the beginning you notice that 3b is only one 
of three choices.

> /fc

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09 18:23   ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-06-09 21:33     ` Adrian Bunk
  2003-06-09 21:50       ` David Schwartz
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2003-06-09 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Frank Cusack, Andrew Miklas, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 07:23:52PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Llu, 2003-06-09 at 06:22, Frank Cusack wrote:
> > > Finally, it would be strange if the source was included in the physical
> > > package, as my contact at Linksys was initially unaware Linux was used
> > > in this product.
> > 
> > Note that including the source with the physical package is not enough
> > to meet the GPL requirements.  The source must be available to any third
> > party, not just purchasers of the product.
> 
> Wrong. Its a common misconception. The GPL requires I make source
> available to those I give the binaries, be it a box on a supermarket
> shelf or a one of product for a client.
> 
> In fact the GPL has to do this because it is really import that the
> author is not hit with the cost of third party distribution. What the
> author cannot do is forbid that third party distribution.

It depends which choice the distributor chooses regarding section three
of the GPL.

If he chooses 3b ("written offer, valid for at least three years, to
give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically
performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the
corresponding source code") he has to give it to everyone.

You are right for 3a (source shipped together with the binaries) and 3c 
(noncommercial redistribution of binaries received under 3b).

> In Linksys case dumping the required source on the end of the CD of
> goodies that comes with the kit and including a notice would be
> sufficient. 

Yup.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  3:39 ` John Shifflett
@ 2003-06-09 18:26   ` Alan Cox
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-09 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: John Shifflett; +Cc: Erik Andersen, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Llu, 2003-06-09 at 04:39, John Shifflett wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Erik Andersen wrote:
> > On Sunday, Jun 08 2003, 15:57:04 EST, Peter Westwood wrote:
> > >
> > > In a similar vein to the Linksys router.  I have a Buffalo (Melco) WBR-G54.
> 
> Fry's appears to be selling a lot of Linksys WAP-54g units, which are low 
> cost wireless access points. For firmware version 1.06.03, the cramfs 
> starts at skip=24576c, bs=32c.

Has anyone had a lawyer write and advise Fry s yet ? Hey theory seems to
work for SCO 8)


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  5:47   ` Frank Cusack
  2003-06-09 16:53     ` David Schwartz
@ 2003-06-09 18:25     ` Alan Cox
  2003-06-09 21:37     ` Adrian Bunk
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-09 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frank Cusack; +Cc: David Schwartz, public, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Llu, 2003-06-09 at 06:47, Frank Cusack wrote:
> Section 3(b) of GPLv2 says "Accompany it with a written offer ...  to give
> any third party ... [the] source code".
> 
> If the source code is actually distributed with the object code, then
> they need only make it available to those who obtain the object code.
> Of course those folks are free to redistribute to anyone, if they want.

This is specific only to the written offer case. MOst people I know
throw the tar ball on the CD they already ship holding manuals, windows
installer for the pointless gui config app etc


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  5:22 ` Frank Cusack
       [not found]   ` <20030609053010$504e@gated-at.bofh.it>
  2003-06-09 14:09   ` Horst von Brand
@ 2003-06-09 18:23   ` Alan Cox
  2003-06-09 21:33     ` Adrian Bunk
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-09 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frank Cusack; +Cc: Andrew Miklas, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Llu, 2003-06-09 at 06:22, Frank Cusack wrote:
> > Finally, it would be strange if the source was included in the physical
> > package, as my contact at Linksys was initially unaware Linux was used
> > in this product.
> 
> Note that including the source with the physical package is not enough
> to meet the GPL requirements.  The source must be available to any third
> party, not just purchasers of the product.

Wrong. Its a common misconception. The GPL requires I make source
available to those I give the binaries, be it a box on a supermarket
shelf or a one of product for a client.

In fact the GPL has to do this because it is really import that the
author is not hit with the cost of third party distribution. What the
author cannot do is forbid that third party distribution.

In Linksys case dumping the required source on the end of the CD of
goodies that comes with the kit and including a notice would be
sufficient. 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* RE: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  5:47   ` Frank Cusack
@ 2003-06-09 16:53     ` David Schwartz
  2003-06-09 18:25     ` Alan Cox
  2003-06-09 21:37     ` Adrian Bunk
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: David Schwartz @ 2003-06-09 16:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frank Cusack; +Cc: public, linux-kernel


> On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 10:32:52PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:

> > Including the source with the product would be insufficient to
> > meet the GPL
> > requirements. They would have to offer the source (or a written offer to
> > obtain the source for no more than the cost of physically copying it) to
> > everyone who downloaded their software from their web site. The
> > GPL is quite
> > clear that the source code offer must be made to anyone to whom
> > the object
> > code is distributed. (The program must be accompanied by the offer.)

> No, a source code *offer* must be made to anyone, period.

	No.

> Section 3(b) of GPLv2 says "Accompany it with a written offer ...  to give
> any third party ... [the] source code".

	"Accompany" means two things have to travel together. If I have to
accompany a car with an instruction manual, it does not follow that I must
give the instruction manual to anyone who requests it.

> If the source code is actually distributed with the object code, then
> they need only make it available to those who obtain the object code.
> Of course those folks are free to redistribute to anyone, if they want.

	But the object code is available from their web site. I don't see how you
can accompany a download with a written offer, so to comply with the GPL,
they must "accompany" the object code with the source code.

	DS



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* RE: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09 13:13 Downing, Thomas
@ 2003-06-09 16:49 ` Martin List-Petersen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Martin List-Petersen @ 2003-06-09 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Downing, Thomas
  Cc: Russell King, Colm MacCárthaigh, Andrew Miklas, linux-kernel

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1087 bytes --]

On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 15:13, Downing, Thomas wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell King [mailto:rmk@arm.linux.org.uk]
> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 5:48 PM
> 
> >>   http://www.vitalsystem.com/
> >
> > and www.armlinux.net.  Linus has already been informed of this situation,
> > and we came to the conclusion that, at the time, there was no way to
> > enforce the copyright due to their location in the world.  This may have
> > changed recently.
> 
> IANAL and all that, but VITAL Systems Inc. list themselves as having
> a corporate HQ in Phoenix, AZ, USA.  As such, were someone interested,
> a suit could proceed in US courts.
> -

Vital Systems Inc (http://www.vitalsystem.com) is not Vitals Systems (http://www.armlinux.net). Thats a wrong. And the
one that is ignoring the GPL here is Vitals Systems (http://www.armlinux.net).

Unfortunatly not based in the U.S.



Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot dk
--
Lie, n.:
        A very poor substitute for the truth, but the only one
        discovered to date.



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  5:22 ` Frank Cusack
       [not found]   ` <20030609053010$504e@gated-at.bofh.it>
@ 2003-06-09 14:09   ` Horst von Brand
  2003-06-09 18:23   ` Alan Cox
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Horst von Brand @ 2003-06-09 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Frank Cusack; +Cc: Andrew Miklas, linux-kernel

Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> said:

[...]

> Note that including the source with the physical package is not enough
> to meet the GPL requirements.  The source must be available to any third
> party, not just purchasers of the product.

Nope. The product (binary) has to be freely redistributable, and everybody
who gets the binary has the right to get the source.

IANAL, and no GPL-expert either, but...
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* RE: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-09 13:13 Downing, Thomas
  2003-06-09 16:49 ` Martin List-Petersen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Downing, Thomas @ 2003-06-09 13:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Russell King, Colm MacCárthaigh; +Cc: Andrew Miklas, linux-kernel

-----Original Message-----
From: Russell King [mailto:rmk@arm.linux.org.uk]
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 5:48 PM

>>   http://www.vitalsystem.com/
>
> and www.armlinux.net.  Linus has already been informed of this situation,
> and we came to the conclusion that, at the time, there was no way to
> enforce the copyright due to their location in the world.  This may have
> changed recently.

IANAL and all that, but VITAL Systems Inc. list themselves as having
a corporate HQ in Phoenix, AZ, USA.  As such, were someone interested,
a suit could proceed in US courts.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 23:55 ` Martin List-Petersen
@ 2003-06-09  8:47   ` Hakan Lennestal
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Hakan Lennestal @ 2003-06-09  8:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Martin List-Petersen; +Cc: Hakan Lennestal, linux-kernel



On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Martin List-Petersen wrote:

> On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 01:25, Hakan Lennestal wrote:
> > Linux drivers, etc for Broadcom wlan chipsets
> > is to be found within the AirForce program from Broadcom.
> > The OneDriver infrastucture concept offers drivers
> > for Linux and VxWorks.
>
> Yes, but nobody can get his hands on this. Broadcom doesn't reply on requests.

I'm quite sure that Linksys, Melco etc have full access to this software.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
       [not found]   ` <20030609053010$504e@gated-at.bofh.it>
@ 2003-06-09  8:28     ` Florian Weimer
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2003-06-09  8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> writes:

> Note that including the source with the physical package is not enough
> to meet the GPL requirements.  The source must be available to any third
> party, not just purchasers of the product.

Not true, you have two options, physical medium or written offer.
Choosing just one is perfectly acceptable.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  3:47 Russ Dill
@ 2003-06-09  8:04 ` Russell King
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Russell King @ 2003-06-09  8:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Russ Dill; +Cc: linux-kernel, andersen

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 08:47:16PM -0700, Russ Dill wrote:
> While a company including udhcp is a really exciting thing for me, its
> mostly exciting because I get the additional resources of anyone at
> linksys working on the code, and they get a low cost of ownership dhcp
> server. Of course, if they don't send me the code, it doesn't help me at
> all, and I get pissed off.

Exactly the same is true of my EBSA285 BIOS.  The "fix" for the situation
that the infringers came up with was to take down the binary download from
their website which allowed me to obtain a binary copy of my code.  They
refused to supply source, and to date, I haven't heard anything from the
company concerned.

-- 
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  5:32 ` David Schwartz
@ 2003-06-09  5:47   ` Frank Cusack
  2003-06-09 16:53     ` David Schwartz
                       ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Frank Cusack @ 2003-06-09  5:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Schwartz; +Cc: public, linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 10:32:52PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> Including the source with the product would be insufficient to meet the GPL
> requirements. They would have to offer the source (or a written offer to
> obtain the source for no more than the cost of physically copying it) to
> everyone who downloaded their software from their web site. The GPL is quite
> clear that the source code offer must be made to anyone to whom the object
> code is distributed. (The program must be accompanied by the offer.)

No, a source code *offer* must be made to anyone, period.

Section 3(b) of GPLv2 says "Accompany it with a written offer ...  to give
any third party ... [the] source code".

If the source code is actually distributed with the object code, then
they need only make it available to those who obtain the object code.
Of course those folks are free to redistribute to anyone, if they want.

/fc

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* RE: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08  2:41 Andrew Miklas
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2003-06-09  5:22 ` Frank Cusack
@ 2003-06-09  5:32 ` David Schwartz
  2003-06-09  5:47   ` Frank Cusack
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: David Schwartz @ 2003-06-09  5:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: public, linux-kernel


> Also, I should note
> that I don't
> own this product, so I can't determine if the source is shipped with it.

	Including the source with the product would be insufficient to meet the GPL
requirements. They would have to offer the source (or a written offer to
obtain the source for no more than the cost of physically copying it) to
everyone who downloaded their software from their web site. The GPL is quite
clear that the source code offer must be made to anyone to whom the object
code is distributed. (The program must be accompanied by the offer.)

	DS



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08  2:41 Andrew Miklas
  2003-06-08 11:54 ` Dave Jones
  2003-06-08 19:44 ` Colm MacCárthaigh
@ 2003-06-09  5:22 ` Frank Cusack
       [not found]   ` <20030609053010$504e@gated-at.bofh.it>
                     ` (2 more replies)
  2003-06-09  5:32 ` David Schwartz
  3 siblings, 3 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Frank Cusack @ 2003-06-09  5:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Miklas; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 10:41:23PM -0400, Andrew Miklas wrote:
> However, I have gone through all the available information on the Linksys
> website, and can find no reference to the GPL, Linux (as it relates to
> this product), or the firmware source code.  Also, the firmware binary
> (see below) is freely available from their website.  There is no link
> from the download page to the source, or any mention of Linux or the GPL.

Requoting the above license violations for context.

> Finally, it would be strange if the source was included in the physical
> package, as my contact at Linksys was initially unaware Linux was used
> in this product.

Note that including the source with the physical package is not enough
to meet the GPL requirements.  The source must be available to any third
party, not just purchasers of the product.

/fc

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-09  3:47 Russ Dill
  2003-06-09  8:04 ` Russell King
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Russ Dill @ 2003-06-09  3:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel; +Cc: andersen

<udhcp maintainer hat on>

> <BusyBox maintainer hat on>

> I went through a similar exercise several weeks ago when I saw
> the thread on the l-k mailing list.  It took just a fix minutes
> to extract the linux kernel and cramfs filesystem from their
> firmware.  Linksys is indeed shipping BusyBox and the Linux
> kernel without releasing source in violation of the GPL.  I had
> my lawyer (it helps to have a lawyer for a Dad) send them a
> rather polite but firm letter about 3 weeks ago.  No response.
> So he has now sent them a second letter...  Assuming we again get
> no response, Linksys is going to find themselves in court in the
> very near future.

<udhcp maintainer hat on>

While a company including udhcp is a really exciting thing for me, its
mostly exciting because I get the additional resources of anyone at
linksys working on the code, and they get a low cost of ownership dhcp
server. Of course, if they don't send me the code, it doesn't help me at
all, and I get pissed off.

By downloading the firmware, and looking at the output of strings
usr/sbin/udhcpd makes it pretty clear that they have made modifications.
Anyway, sign me on for whatever legal actions you are making, caus I
want my code back.

-- 
Russ Dill


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  0:05 Erik Andersen
@ 2003-06-09  3:39 ` John Shifflett
  2003-06-09 18:26   ` Alan Cox
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: John Shifflett @ 2003-06-09  3:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Erik Andersen; +Cc: linux-kernel


On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Erik Andersen wrote:
> On Sunday, Jun 08 2003, 15:57:04 EST, Peter Westwood wrote:
> >
> > In a similar vein to the Linksys router.  I have a Buffalo (Melco) WBR-G54.

Fry's appears to be selling a lot of Linksys WAP-54g units, which are low 
cost wireless access points. For firmware version 1.06.03, the cramfs 
starts at skip=24576c, bs=32c.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  0:09 ` Paul Jakma
@ 2003-06-09  1:11   ` Erik Andersen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Erik Andersen @ 2003-06-09  1:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Jakma; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Mon Jun 09, 2003 at 01:09:45AM +0100, Paul Jakma wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Erik Andersen wrote:
> 
> > BTW, this is what I did to open up the Linksys rom...
> 
> interesting.. what do you make of:
> 
> 	http://download.qlogic.com/sf/10215/fullimage_1.5.1.04.zip
> 
> which is the firmware that runs on QLogic SANBox2 2Gbit fibre-channel
> switches (Cyrix MediaGX iirc). Looking at strings it includes
> software such as glib (LGPL), Linux and GRUB.
> 
> QLogic did not answer my request for source to the (L)GPL 
> parts of the firmware when i asked them.

gzip magic at 0x4110 for a compressed 1.7 MB, i386, 
2.4.18-xfs linux kernel

x86 boot sector with GRUB at 0xE3ACB6

gzip magic at 0xFA0E4 for file named "image" that contains 
a compressed 24 MB ext2 filesystem

gzip magic at 0x80D278 for a compressed 1.7 MB, i386,
2.4.18-xfs linux kernel (apparently a backup)

gzip magic at 0x90324Ci for a file name "fl_image" that
also contains a compressed 24 MB ext2 filesystem

A quick look through their filesystem shows plenty of GPL'd
stuff.  Mostly looks lika RedHat ripoff, with a bunch of
apparently proprietary junk under /itasca,

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-09  0:19 ` Oliver M. Bolzer
@ 2003-06-09  0:31   ` Jeff
  2003-06-10 20:43   ` Michael Neuffer
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Jeff @ 2003-06-09  0:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Another product from Linksys that runs linux is "EtherFast® Network Attached 
Storage." The firmware contains an ext2 image with some i386 binaries. It 
appears to be running 2.4.14-xfs (I did not locate the kernel, but the 
network module has it as a version.)

This is what I did:

unzip efg80.zip
mv EFG80_V10R33.bin EFG80_V10R33.bin.tar.gz
tar -xzf EFG80_V10R33.bin.tar.gz
cd rpm
mv system.img system.img.gz
gzip -df system.img
mount system.img /mnt -t ext2 -o loop

Jeff.

P.S. I did not check every document Linksys has about this product.

- -- 
I have recently changed my GPG key from 0x68FA8E08 to 0xC7958FFE.
For more information see http://www.sweb.cz/supertucnak/gpg/

- --
FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #19
A:      To be or not to be.
Q:      What is the square root of 4b^2?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+49VswFP0+seVj/4RAkuLAJ9T2qfgmCd2U7bYlLnQxKKZXHmFbwCgs4ls
U1rTKpeeiXUsxgT+N0Ixjhc=
=yUuw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 20:57 Peter Westwood
  2003-06-08 21:52 ` Russell King
  2003-06-08 23:18 ` bill-linuxkernel20030609
@ 2003-06-09  0:19 ` Oliver M. Bolzer
  2003-06-09  0:31   ` Jeff
  2003-06-10 20:43   ` Michael Neuffer
  2 siblings, 2 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Oliver M. Bolzer @ 2003-06-09  0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 09:57:04PM +0100, Peter Westwood <peter.westwood@talk21.com> wrote...
 
> Looking through the latest firmware update available :
> http://www.buffalo-technology.com/support/firmware.htm

> No mention here or anywhere on there site of the GPL or the source code to
> what they are distributing!

I have another product from Melco/Buffalo and found out, that it had
Linux and other GPLed (and BSD with adv. clause and Apache with end-user
doc clasue and and and) materials on it, without the manual or their web page
mentioning it. Their telephone support 
in Japan (where the stuff comes from) didn't give sh*t about it and
repeatedly told me about their policy of not telling anything about the
inner workings of products and even refused to either elevate me to talk
to somebody else or give me an contacting point to either their legal
or PR departments.
I directly called the PR guy responsible for that line of products at their
headquater (good to be on their list of press) and explained the situation
to him. He promised to clear it up with legal and the developers.
After about a week (and me ranting about an anonymous company in my blog)
he got back with a very detailed and polite answer about the situation.
They DID know about the issues involved and their obligations. Just that
their other hand (like support and web page creation) isn't up to the
"new" style and that they were fixing it. I also found out, that the
"quick setup" leaflet in the product actually contained a small note
that the product included GPLed software. 

It has been 3 month since. If they havn't gotten their act together 
still, they need to be reminded of it.

-- 
	Oliver M. Bolzer
	oliver@gol.com

GPG (PGP) Fingerprint = 621B 52F6 2AC1 36DB 8761  018F 8786 87AD EF50 D1FF

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 23:35 Erik Andersen
@ 2003-06-09  0:09 ` Paul Jakma
  2003-06-09  1:11   ` Erik Andersen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Paul Jakma @ 2003-06-09  0:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Erik Andersen; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Erik Andersen wrote:

> BTW, this is what I did to open up the Linksys rom...

interesting.. what do you make of:

	http://download.qlogic.com/sf/10215/fullimage_1.5.1.04.zip

which is the firmware that runs on QLogic SANBox2 2Gbit fibre-channel
switches (Cyrix MediaGX iirc). Looking at strings it includes
software such as glib (LGPL), Linux and GRUB.

QLogic did not answer my request for source to the (L)GPL 
parts of the firmware when i asked them.

>  -Erik

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul@clubi.ie	paul@jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
	warning: do not ever send email to spam@dishone.st
Fortune:
All I ask is a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-09  0:05 Erik Andersen
  2003-06-09  3:39 ` John Shifflett
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Erik Andersen @ 2003-06-09  0:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Westwood; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sunday, Jun 08 2003, 15:57:04 EST, Peter Westwood wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> In a similar vein to the Linksys router.  I have a Buffalo (Melco) WBR-G54.
> 
> Looking through the latest firmware update available :
> http://www.buffalo-technology.com/support/firmware.htm
> 
> It does appear to be similar to the Linksys firmware and contain linux and
> possibly busybox
> 
> No mention here or anywhere on there site of the GPL or the source code to
> what they are distributing!

Wow, thanks for the pointer!  I just visited the Buffalo site 
    http://www.buffalo-technology.com/
and I could not find any source code.  And not only are they
distributing the linux kernel and BusyBox, their rom is
_remarkably_ similar to the Linksys one in many respects.
Perhaps they share an upstream vendor that did not make them
aware of their responsibilities?

Here is a script I just whipped up to open up their firmware...

    #!/bin/sh

    wget http://www.buffalo-technology.com/download/firmware/wbr-113b.exe

    # Next I used wine (20030408) to extract the content
    wine wbr-113b.exe

    # Move into the directory into which the firmware was extracted
    cd Wbr_1.13b

    # I noticed a GZIP signature for a file named "piggy" at offset
    # 62 bytes from the start, suggesting we have a compressed Linux
    # kernel
    dd if=wbrbg-113b bs=62 skip=1 | zcat > kernel

    # Noticed there was a cramfs magic signature at offset 786466
    dd if=wbrbg-113b of=cramfs.image bs=786466 skip=1
    file cramfs.image

    sudo mount -o loop,ro -t cramfs ./cramfs.image /mnt 
    ls -la /mnt/bin
    file /mnt/bin/busybox
    strings /mnt/bin/busybox | grep BusyBox
    /usr/i386-linux-uclibc/bin/i386-uclibc-ldd /mnt/bin/busybox

It seems my Dad will have another letter to mail out in the
morning!

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 23:25 Hakan Lennestal
@ 2003-06-08 23:55 ` Martin List-Petersen
  2003-06-09  8:47   ` Hakan Lennestal
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Martin List-Petersen @ 2003-06-08 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Hakan Lennestal; +Cc: linux-kernel

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 493 bytes --]

On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 01:25, Hakan Lennestal wrote:
> A possible common source for wlan router software ?
> 
> Linux drivers, etc for Broadcom wlan chipsets
> is to be found within the AirForce program from Broadcom.
> The OneDriver infrastucture concept offers drivers
> for Linux and VxWorks.

Yes, but nobody can get his hands on this. Broadcom doesn't reply on requests.

Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot dk
--
Preserve the old, but know the new.


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-08 23:35 Erik Andersen
  2003-06-09  0:09 ` Paul Jakma
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Erik Andersen @ 2003-06-08 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

On Sat, 7 Jun 2003 21:53:14 -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
> I went through a similar exercise several weeks ago when I saw
> the thread on the l-k mailing list.  It took just a fix minutes
> to extract the linux kernel and cramfs filesystem from their
> firmware.  Linksys is indeed shipping BusyBox and the Linux

BTW, this is what I did to open up the Linksys rom...

    #!/bin/sh

    wget ftp://ftp.linksys.com/pub/network/WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin

    # I noticed a GZIP signature for a file name "piggy" at offset
    # 60 bytes from the start, suggesting we have a compressed Linux
    # kernel
    dd if=WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin bs=60 skip=1 | zcat > kernel

    # Noticed there was a cramfs magic signature (bytes 45 3D CD 28
    followed shortly by "Compressed ROMFS") at offset 786464
    dd if=WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin of=cramfs.image bs=786464 skip=1
    file cramfs.image

    sudo mount -o loop,ro -t cramfs ./cramfs.image /mnt 
    ls -la /mnt/bin
    file /mnt/bin/busybox
    strings /mnt/bin/busybox | grep BusyBox
    # Use uClibc's ldd to get useful answers for non-x86 binaries
    /usr/i386-linux-uclibc/bin/i386-uclibc-ldd /mnt/bin/busybox

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-08 23:25 Hakan Lennestal
  2003-06-08 23:55 ` Martin List-Petersen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Hakan Lennestal @ 2003-06-08 23:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

A possible common source for wlan router software ?

Linux drivers, etc for Broadcom wlan chipsets
is to be found within the AirForce program from Broadcom.
The OneDriver infrastucture concept offers drivers
for Linux and VxWorks.

http://www.broadcom.com/docs/AirForceFam.pdf

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 20:57 Peter Westwood
  2003-06-08 21:52 ` Russell King
@ 2003-06-08 23:18 ` bill-linuxkernel20030609
  2003-06-09  0:19 ` Oliver M. Bolzer
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: bill-linuxkernel20030609 @ 2003-06-08 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 09:57:04PM +0100, Peter Westwood wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> In a similar vein to the Linksys router.  I have a Buffalo (Melco) WBR-G54.
> 
> Looking through the latest firmware update available :
> http://www.buffalo-technology.com/support/firmware.htm
> 

I grabbed the wbr-113b.exe, lha x ed it
and found a cramfs image 2 bytes further on in the file than
with the linksys firmware.

lha x wbr-113.exe

dd if=wbrbg-113b of=test.dump skip=853 bs=922c

You now have a mountable cramfs which seems to include quite a bit of GPLed free 
software at a glance Zebra, fwlogwatch, busybox, dnrd, udhcpd, ntpclient.


-- 
William Boughton

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 21:50   ` Russell King
@ 2003-06-08 22:48     ` Davide Libenzi
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-08 22:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Russell King; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Russell King wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 02:08:39PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > IANAL, but in many coutries the fact that you didn't know is not an
> > excuse. When you integrate alien parts in your products you become
> > responsible and you have to be sure about all aspects that arise.
>
> What if, when you obtained said parts, it came with a license which
> appeared to be genuine, but in fact was illegally changed in a country
> which has not signed up to the copyright treaty?  (I believe this may
> be part of the story here.)  I believe that you'd need a good copyright
> lawyer, and it may depend upon local law.

I believe that, being the director of a company that will be subject to
potential lawsuits in countries that signed up to the copyright treaty,
I'll stop buying parts from countries that will not guarantee my company
about copyright infringement. Looking their economy to lose huge parts of
its business, maybe it'll suggest those countries to join the copyright
treaty. Yes those parts might be dirt cheap, but if I have to spend big
bucks for lawsuits and if I have to see my company image to lose
sharpness, I'd better go picking up parts where at least I can sue back my
suppliers in case they'll break copyright in what they did license to me.



- Davide


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 20:57 Peter Westwood
@ 2003-06-08 21:52 ` Russell King
  2003-06-08 23:18 ` bill-linuxkernel20030609
  2003-06-09  0:19 ` Oliver M. Bolzer
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Russell King @ 2003-06-08 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Westwood; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 09:57:04PM +0100, Peter Westwood wrote:
> 2601/tcp   open        zebra
> 2602/tcp   open        ripd
> Remote operating system guess: Linux Kernel 2.4.0 - 2.5.20
> Uptime 1.252 days (since Sat Jun 07 15:51:52 2003)
> Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 13 seconds

zebra accepts telnet connections, and displays its version number on
connect.

-- 
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 21:08 ` Davide Libenzi
  2003-06-08 21:23   ` Jack Aboutboul
@ 2003-06-08 21:50   ` Russell King
  2003-06-08 22:48     ` Davide Libenzi
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Russell King @ 2003-06-08 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Davide Libenzi; +Cc: greendisease, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 02:08:39PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> IANAL, but in many coutries the fact that you didn't know is not an
> excuse. When you integrate alien parts in your products you become
> responsible and you have to be sure about all aspects that arise.

What if, when you obtained said parts, it came with a license which
appeared to be genuine, but in fact was illegally changed in a country
which has not signed up to the copyright treaty?  (I believe this may
be part of the story here.)  I believe that you'd need a good copyright
lawyer, and it may depend upon local law.

-- 
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 19:44 ` Colm MacCárthaigh
  2003-06-08 20:14   ` Jörn Engel
@ 2003-06-08 21:47   ` Russell King
  2003-06-09 22:37   ` Daniel Phillips
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Russell King @ 2003-06-08 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Colm MacCárthaigh; +Cc: Andrew Miklas, linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 08:44:22PM +0100, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
> # cat /etc/hosts
> 127.0.0.1               vLinux/Vitals_System_Inc.
>   
> They appear to have a website at:
>   
>   http://www.vitalsystem.com/

and www.armlinux.net.  Linus has already been informed of this situation,
and we came to the conclusion that, at the time, there was no way to
enforce the copyright due to their location in the world.  This may have
changed recently.

Since this is the case, it may be arguable that the users of vLinux from
Vitals are unkowningly breaking the GPL due to the apparant licensing
which Vitals Systems Inc are re-distributing the code to their customers.

-- 
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 21:08 ` Davide Libenzi
@ 2003-06-08 21:23   ` Jack Aboutboul
  2003-06-08 21:50   ` Russell King
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Jack Aboutboul @ 2003-06-08 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Davide Libenzi; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List


On Sunday, Jun 8, 2003, at 17:08 America/New_York, Davide Libenzi wrote:

> IANAL, but in many coutries the fact that you didn't know is not an
> excuse. When you integrate alien parts in your products you become
> responsible and you have to be sure about all aspects that arise.
>
	This is 100% true. I wasn't trying to justify their actions at all, 
just trying to develop some insight into the situation. If they did in 
fact, violate the GPL, they should be forced to pay a penalty and 
disclose their source.

>
> What's so neat in grabbing a bunch GPL protected software and stoking 
> it
> inside a ROM, clearly breaking the license ? Maybe they got only half 
> part
> of the communism thingy, "What is your is also mine and what is mine is
> just mine."

	Thats pretty funny :-). What I meant was that they must be developing 
drivers for these chipsets and we could really use them integrated into 
the kernel. We need all the talent we can get!


Thanks,
Jack


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 20:41 greendisease
@ 2003-06-08 21:08 ` Davide Libenzi
  2003-06-08 21:23   ` Jack Aboutboul
  2003-06-08 21:50   ` Russell King
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-08 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: greendisease; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, greendisease wrote:

> 	First, we shouldn't rush into anything before we gather some facts.
> Linksys may not be the ones developing the software for the WRT54G. In
> fact, many of these router "companies" don't do much besides branding
> at all.  I have spoken to a few friends at netgear and d-link and they
> confirmed that all hardware and software that is used in their router
> products is manufactured and developed in asia-pacific somewhere. They
> just license everything from the manufacturer. Proof of this is that if
> you cracked open many different models of vendors' routers you would
> see that the hardware is almost always the same board just in a
> different case with a different name on it.  Someone should look into
> this and confirm what Linksys does. It may be nothing more than the
> management @ Linksys not knowing what the product runs and what
> licensing restrictions apply.

IANAL, but in many coutries the fact that you didn't know is not an
excuse. When you integrate alien parts in your products you become
responsible and you have to be sure about all aspects that arise.



> 	Second, Linksys is no longer its own entity since it was purchased by
> Cisco. We all know that Cisco is very committed to GNU/OSS. If anything
> comes to a dead end with Linksys we should be able to find some
> engineers at Cisco that can take care of the situation.

No doubt about that.



> 	IMHO, it looks like some very crafty developers somewhere in
> Asia-Pacific are hacking this hardware and software and doing really
> neat things.  We should first try to contact these people and explain
> to them our philosophy and try and get them to join the kernel
> development activities. After all they are already doing some kernel
> hacking and maybe based somewhere in a non-democratic country and are
> therefore afraid to open source their work for fear of political
> repercussion. Please Consider.

What's so neat in grabbing a bunch GPL protected software and stoking it
inside a ROM, clearly breaking the license ? Maybe they got only half part
of the communism thingy, "What is your is also mine and what is mine is
just mine".



- Davide


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-08 20:57 Peter Westwood
  2003-06-08 21:52 ` Russell King
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Peter Westwood @ 2003-06-08 20:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hi All,

In a similar vein to the Linksys router.  I have a Buffalo (Melco) WBR-G54.

Looking through the latest firmware update available :
http://www.buffalo-technology.com/support/firmware.htm

It does appear to be similar to the Linksys firmware and contain linux and
possibly busybox

No mention here or anywhere on there site of the GPL or the source code to
what they are distributing!

Unfortunately an nmap scan only shows the following ports open:

Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap )
Interesting ports on  (192.168.0.1):
(The 1597 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed)
Port       State       Service
53/tcp     open        domain
80/tcp     open        http
2601/tcp   open        zebra
2602/tcp   open        ripd
Remote operating system guess: Linux Kernel 2.4.0 - 2.5.20
Uptime 1.252 days (since Sat Jun 07 15:51:52 2003)
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 13 seconds

No telnet or ssh for me to try to discover more.

--
Peter


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-08 20:41 greendisease
  2003-06-08 21:08 ` Davide Libenzi
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: greendisease @ 2003-06-08 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hey All,

	A quick few comments regarding this situation.
	
	First, we shouldn't rush into anything before we gather some facts.  
Linksys may not be the ones developing the software for the WRT54G. In 
fact, many of these router "companies" don't do much besides branding 
at all.  I have spoken to a few friends at netgear and d-link and they 
confirmed that all hardware and software that is used in their router 
products is manufactured and developed in asia-pacific somewhere. They 
just license everything from the manufacturer. Proof of this is that if 
you cracked open many different models of vendors' routers you would 
see that the hardware is almost always the same board just in a 
different case with a different name on it.  Someone should look into 
this and confirm what Linksys does. It may be nothing more than the 
management @ Linksys not knowing what the product runs and what 
licensing restrictions apply.
	Second, Linksys is no longer its own entity since it was purchased by 
Cisco. We all know that Cisco is very committed to GNU/OSS. If anything 
comes to a dead end with Linksys we should be able to find some 
engineers at Cisco that can take care of the situation.
	IMHO, it looks like some very crafty developers somewhere in 
Asia-Pacific are hacking this hardware and software and doing really 
neat things.  We should first try to contact these people and explain 
to them our philosophy and try and get them to join the kernel 
development activities. After all they are already doing some kernel 
hacking and maybe based somewhere in a non-democratic country and are 
therefore afraid to open source their work for fear of political 
repercussion. Please Consider.
	Lets try to help before we harm, we might make a few friends.


Thanks,
Jack Aboutboul


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 19:44 ` Colm MacCárthaigh
@ 2003-06-08 20:14   ` Jörn Engel
  2003-06-08 21:47   ` Russell King
  2003-06-09 22:37   ` Daniel Phillips
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Jörn Engel @ 2003-06-08 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Colm MacCárthaigh; +Cc: Andrew Miklas, linux-kernel

On Sun, 8 June 2003 20:44:22 +0100, Colm MacCárthaigh wrote:
> 
> Early in the year, I purchased a nice new Dell Laptop, for running Linux
> on, of course. Since it saved me money, I bought a Dell TrueMobile 1184
> Access Point/Router at the same time.
> 
> [six weeks later]
> 
> Dell now ship a copy of the source and the license on the CD that
> comes with the TrueMobile kit. I really have to make clear here,
> Dell did amazingly well, they researched it, kept me informed,
> responded positively, and rectified procedures. It's a great example
> of how to do it right. 

Nice.  This looks like the first hardware router that could really
fancy my wishes.  And if I buy this piece of hardware, Dell can
attribute that directly to the software running on it and the kind of
control it offers to me.

Should be a great thing for companies as well.  Unknown software
without support or updates and a direct internet connection is a
nightmare for security.  And that was what most "hardware" routers
boiled down to and still do.

Jörn

-- 
A surrounded army must be given a way out.
-- Sun Tzu

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08  2:41 Andrew Miklas
  2003-06-08 11:54 ` Dave Jones
@ 2003-06-08 19:44 ` Colm MacCárthaigh
  2003-06-08 20:14   ` Jörn Engel
                     ` (2 more replies)
  2003-06-09  5:22 ` Frank Cusack
  2003-06-09  5:32 ` David Schwartz
  3 siblings, 3 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Colm MacCárthaigh @ 2003-06-08 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Miklas; +Cc: linux-kernel


[general note: please cc, I'm not on lkml]

Andrew,

I was involved in a similar such action with Dell, though I had somewhat
different approach, but nevertheless I'm going to recount my experiences
as it may be useful for the purposes of comparison. Others: mark as read
now if you don't like long mails.

Early in the year, I purchased a nice new Dell Laptop, for running Linux
on, of course. Since it saved me money, I bought a Dell TrueMobile 1184
Access Point/Router at the same time.

 http://tinyurl.com/ds6i (accessories.us.dell.com)

 http://tinyurl.com/ds6d (support.ap.dell.com)

Give an impression of the product. Being a Network Engineer, I felt
compelled to fingerprint the device, very quickly finding that it
ran telnet on port 333, and after loging in (using the root username,
and the admin password), found that it was running armlinux:

# cat /proc/version

Linux version 2.2.14-v1.9 (root@localhost.localdomain) (gcc version
2.9-vLinux-armtool-0523) #5357 Sat Jan 25 17:39:42 CST 2003

# cat /proc/cpuinfo   
Processor       : S3C4510/SEC arm7tdmi rev 0
BogoMips        : 44.24
Hardware        : <NULL>

Other GPL software was abundant, including ipchains, busybox .. and
other things you would expect. Running Linux of course pleased me,
because it meant I put it to some real use (currently it's also
my house print server for example) as I had a self-built router
I wasnt going to stop using (I mean how could anyone live without
IPv6?). 

After some discussion on ILUG (www.linux.ie), I researched it further,
I double-checked, and none of the documentation Dell sent me, nor the
software CD, nor the website indicated it was using GPL software, and
did provide me with a copy of the license, or a written offer with a
means to obtain the source. I'm not a licensing hack, and I almost
would have been prepared to just leave it be had the Documentation not
said:

"Requirements:
  
  You must have at least one computer that has the following: 

   1. Running Microsoft(R) Windows(R) 98, 98SE, Windows Me,
      Windows 2000, Windows XP Home or XP Professional (
      Windows 2000 or XP require you to have administrator
      privileges on your computer in order to configure the
      router - see the computers users' guide for more information)
   2. A CD drive
   3. An active Internet connection"

Which supremely annoyed me, as of course all you need is *any* 
IP capable system for the router to work, it just uses plain NAT,
nothing Windows specific, and you can use any browser to configure
it's luser interface. So after some grepping:

# cat /etc/hosts
127.0.0.1               vLinux/Vitals_System_Inc.
  
They appear to have a website at:
  
  http://www.vitalsystem.com/

Though

  http://www.onsoftwarei.com/
  
seem to be the people who license support vlinux:

  http://www.onsoftwarei.com/product/prod_vlinux.htm

I'm sure there are people on-list with much more in-depth knowlege of
these companies.

Anyway, since in my case, Dell were the direct vendor, I contacted them
first. After some number chasing, I was passed to Dell Ireland's Legal
Director, who got on to the Dell US guys. 

I have to say that allthough it took some time for the issue to be
resolved, Dell were abosulutely brilliant about it, and kept me
informed, they were extremely friendly and helpful about the request.

The original mail I sent Dell is available at:

 http://www.redbrick.dcu.ie/~colmmacc/TrueMobile-1184/dell.letter

But after that, most of the action happened on phone. 6 weeks
later, Seamus (Dell Legal) was able to respond positively to my
request, and I got a CD including the source free of Charge, and
a nice letter:

 http://www.redbrick.dcu.ie/~colmmacc/TrueMobile-1184/dell.jpg

The contents are available online, and if anyone wants it, mails
me and I'll give you the URL, but to save me bandwidth - it's
vanilla Linux 2.2.14 with the 2.2.14-rmk4 patch, nothing bespoke.
But now that I had the configuration, I could actually build 
a replacement IPv6 capable kernel. 

Dell have also reviewed their procedures to ensure that this kind
of thing does not happen again, and from talking to Dell Legal I
got the impression that it was the result of suppliers not fully
informing Dell about Licensing provisions. 

Dell now ship a copy of the source and the license on the CD that
comes with the TrueMobile kit. I really have to make clear here,
Dell did amazingly well, they researched it, kept me informed,
responded positively, and rectified procedures. It's a great example
of how to do it right. 

So, I don't know what the linksys situation is fully, but I do hope
that this report may help you in that it gives an example of a
near-identical situation having been resolved successfully in the past.

I also know from Dell Legal, that my request generated a lot of 
e-mail internal to Dell legal, so I'm sure they researched it very
well. If Dell Legal come to the conclusion that this is what they
must do, that certainly might be a useful example to point Linksys
at.

On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 10:41:23PM -0400, Andrew Miklas wrote:
> Sorry for the very lengthly posting, but I want to be as precise as possible 
> in describing this problem.
> 
> Awhile ago, I mentioned that the Linksys WRT54G wireless access point used 
> several GPL projects in its firmware, but did not seem to have any of the 
> source available, or acknowledge the use of the GPLed software.  Four weeks 
> ago, I spoke with an employee at Linksys who confirmed that the system did 
> use Linux, and also mentioned that he would work with his management to 
> ensure that the source was released.  Unfortunately, my e-mails to this 
> individual over the past three weeks have gone unanswered.  Of course, I also 
> tried contacting Linksys through their common public e-mail accounts 
> (pr@linksys.com, mailroom@linksys.com) to no avail.
> 
> However, it is hard for me to know if my contact in the company has just gone 
> on a three week vacation (and not set an auto-responder), or has been asked 
> to not answer anymore mail on this subject.  Also, I should note that I don't 
> own this product, so I can't determine if the source is shipped with it.  
> However, I have gone through all the available information on the Linksys 
> website, and can find no reference to the GPL, Linux (as it relates to this 
> product), or the firmware source code.  Also, the firmware binary (see below) 
> is freely available from their website.  There is no link from the download 
> page to the source, or any mention of Linux or the GPL.  Finally, it would be 
> strange if the source was included in the physical package, as my contact at 
> Linksys was initially unaware Linux was used in this product.
> 
> 
> 
> The following steps can be used to determine the exact nature of the possible 
> GPL violation.
> 
> 1. Go to the following URL:
>     http://www.linksys.com/download/firmware.asp?fwid=178
> 
> 2. Download the "firmware upgrade files":     
> ftp://ftp.linksys.com/pub/network/WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin
>     (MD5SUM: b54475a81bc18462d3754f96c9c7cc0f)
> 
> 3. While it is downloading, confirm that there is nothing on the webpage to 
> indicate that this binary contains GPLed software.
> 
> 4. Once the download is complete, copy the contents of the file from offset 
> 0xC0020 onward into a new file.
>     dd if=WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin of=test.dump skip=24577c bs=32c
> 
> 5. Notice that this file is an image of a CramFS filesystem.
>     Mount it.
> 
> 6. Explore the filesystem.  You will notice that the system appears to be 
> based on Linux 2.4.5.
>    Incidentally, there is at least one other GPLed project in the firmware: 
> the BusyBox userland component: (http://www.busybox.net/)
> 
> 7. The Linux kernel (I think) is mixed up with a bunch of other stuff in:
>     bin/boot.bin
> 
> 
> 
> You might want to know why I am interested in getting the code for the kernel 
> used in this device.
> 
> There's been some discussion here about Linux's lack of wireless support for a 
> few of the newer 802.11b and (nearly?) all 802.11g chips.  Incidentally, 
> Linux has excellent support for at least one manufacturer's wireless family.  
> The following Broadcom chips all appear to be supported under Linux -- if you 
> happen to be running Linux on a MIPS processor in a Linksys router:
> 
> Broadcom BCM4301 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4307 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11a Controller
> Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11 Multiband Controller
> Broadcom BCM4310 Wireless 802.11b Controller
> Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11b/g Controller
> Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11a Controller
> Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11 Multiband Controller
> 
> This list was produced by running strings on:
> lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/net/wl/wl.o
> 
> I am trying to determine exactly how tightly coupled these drivers are to the 
> kernel.
> 
> As an aside, I know that some wireless companies have been hesitant of 
> releasing open source drivers because they are worried their radios might be 
> pushed out of spec.  However, if the drivers are already written, would there 
> be any technical reason why they could not simply be recompiled for Intel 
> hardware, and released as binary-only modules?
> 
> 
> 
> Finally, I know that traditionally, Linux has allowed binary-only modules.  
> However, I was always under the impression that this required that the final 
> customer be allowed to remove them at will.  That is to say, you couldn't 
> choose to implement a portion of the kernel critical to the system's 
> operation in a module, and then not release that module under the GPL.  In 
> this particular case, I would argue that the wireless drivers are critical to 
> this device's operation (after all, it is a wireless access point).  In 
> addition, the final user in this case really can't just "rmmod" the wireless 
> driver.
> 
> The Broadcom driver, kernel, and really everything else in the firmware, are 
> (IMHO anyways) being used to form a discrete package -- the WRT54Gs firmware.  
> Does/should this have any implication on whether the Broadcom wireless module 
> must be covered by the GPL?
> 
> 
> 
> I would be very interested in knowing if I am mistaken in any of my claims or 
> conclusions, and if not, how I should proceed in getting this issue resolved.
> 
> 
> -- Andrew Miklas
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 
> 

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
colm@stdlib.net					  http://www.stdlib.net/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 11:54 ` Dave Jones
  2003-06-08 14:23   ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-06-08 18:13   ` uaca
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: uaca @ 2003-06-08 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 12:54:02PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 10:41:23PM -0400, Andrew Miklas wrote:
>  > 1. Go to the following URL:
>  >     http://www.linksys.com/download/firmware.asp?fwid=178
[...]
> Curiously, the Belkin products (http://networking.belkin.com) also seem


just for curious, anybody run nmap against these devices?

	Ulisses

                Debian GNU/Linux: a dream come true
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Computers are useless. They can only give answers."            Pablo Picasso

--->	Visita http://www.valux.org/ para saber acerca de la	<---
--->	Asociación Valenciana de Usuarios de Linux		<---
 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 16:49       ` Adrian Bunk
@ 2003-06-08 17:00         ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Dr. David Alan Gilbert @ 2003-06-08 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: linux-kernel

* Adrian Bunk (bunk@fs.tum.de) wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 02:52:12PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> >...
> > 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.
> 
> This is wrong.
> 
> Setion 3 of the GPL clearly states they have to accompany their 
> product either with the complete source code or with a written offer,  
> valid for at least three years, to give any third party the complete 
> source code.

While probably true, if someone acknowledged the GPL'd code,
had contributed changes back and pointed you at the sites main
distribution site you wouldn't really get too fussy about them actually
physically supplying a copy would you? (And anyway that was all written
before everyone had net access and could go and get their own copy).

Dave
 ---------------- Have a happy GNU millennium! ----------------------   
/ Dr. David Alan Gilbert    | Running GNU/Linux on Alpha,68K| Happy  \ 
\ gro.gilbert @ treblig.org | MIPS,x86,ARM,SPARC,PPC & HPPA | In Hex /
 \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org   |_______/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 13:52     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
  2003-06-08 14:05       ` Marcus Metzler
@ 2003-06-08 16:49       ` Adrian Bunk
  2003-06-08 17:00         ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2003-06-08 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dr. David Alan Gilbert; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 02:52:12PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>...
> 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.

This is wrong.

Setion 3 of the GPL clearly states they have to accompany their 
product either with the complete source code or with a written offer,  
valid for at least three years, to give any third party the complete 
source code.

> 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?

See above, they must offer the complete source code (except for the 
source for non-GPL'd drivers) with their products.

> Dave

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08  3:13 Brad Chapman
@ 2003-06-08 16:35 ` Davide Libenzi
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Davide Libenzi @ 2003-06-08 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Brad Chapman; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Sat, 7 Jun 2003, Brad Chapman wrote:

> Mr. Miklas,
>
> I find your discourse on this subject very interesting -- it would
> seem you have successfully outlined a double standard that, to me,
> does appear to violate the GPL (IANAL).
>
> The question now becomes: Why is Linksys and/or Broadcom doing this?

These guys, not only they make money using GNU/Linux inside their products
but they do even refuse to support the GNU/Linux community when it comes
to drivers. In many cases even a mere binary driver is not available. This
is as lame as it gets.



- Davide


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 11:54 ` Dave Jones
@ 2003-06-08 14:23   ` Alan Cox
  2003-06-08 18:13   ` uaca
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-06-08 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dave Jones; +Cc: Andrew Miklas, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Sul, 2003-06-08 at 12:54, Dave Jones wrote:
> Curiously, the Belkin products (http://networking.belkin.com) also seem
> to be based upon the same source.  Looks like they could just be
> rebranded firmware images with some features disabled.

If Belkin are shipping the same code and apparently got it from Linksys
someone migth also care to write to Belkin and inform them about this.
They may not even know about their rather large potential liability.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 13:52     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
@ 2003-06-08 14:05       ` Marcus Metzler
  2003-06-08 16:49       ` Adrian Bunk
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Marcus Metzler @ 2003-06-08 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dr. David Alan Gilbert; +Cc: linux-kernel

Dr. David Alan Gilbert writes:
 > 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.
 > 
 > 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.
 > 
 > 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, there should be a driver for the 802.11g (or is it a) card in
there. The question is whether they did it as a module or not.
It would be nice if the contributed that in any case.

Marcus

-- 
/--------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Dr. Marcus O.C. Metzler        |                                   |
|--------------------------------|-----------------------------------|
| mocm@metzlerbros.de            | http://www.metzlerbros.de/        |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------/


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 12:01   ` Christian Ullrich
@ 2003-06-08 13:52     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
  2003-06-08 14:05       ` Marcus Metzler
  2003-06-08 16:49       ` Adrian Bunk
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Dr. David Alan Gilbert @ 2003-06-08 13:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

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.

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.

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?

Dave
 ---------------- Have a happy GNU millennium! ----------------------   
/ Dr. David Alan Gilbert    | Running GNU/Linux on Alpha,68K| Happy  \ 
\ gro.gilbert @ treblig.org | MIPS,x86,ARM,SPARC,PPC & HPPA | In Hex /
 \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org   |_______/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08 10:08 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
@ 2003-06-08 12:01   ` Christian Ullrich
  2003-06-08 13:52     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Christian Ullrich @ 2003-06-08 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

* Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:

> Erik Andersen <andersen@codepoet.org> writes:
> 
>>So he has now sent them a second letter...  Assuming we again get
>>no response, Linksys is going to find themselves in court in the
>>very near future.
> 
> Go for it. This might be the acid test to see whether the GPL
> holds up in court...

And be sure to tell the FSF. Look here:
<http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html>. The FSF does not
hold copyright to busybox, but I think they will find ways of 
supporting you.

-- 
Christian Ullrich                  Registered Linux User #125183

"Remember: 'I am a person. I have a right to the ball.'"


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08  2:41 Andrew Miklas
@ 2003-06-08 11:54 ` Dave Jones
  2003-06-08 14:23   ` Alan Cox
  2003-06-08 18:13   ` uaca
  2003-06-08 19:44 ` Colm MacCárthaigh
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 2 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Dave Jones @ 2003-06-08 11:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Miklas; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 10:41:23PM -0400, Andrew Miklas wrote:
 > 1. Go to the following URL:
 >     http://www.linksys.com/download/firmware.asp?fwid=178
 > 
 > 2. Download the "firmware upgrade files":     
 > ftp://ftp.linksys.com/pub/network/WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin
 >     (MD5SUM: b54475a81bc18462d3754f96c9c7cc0f)
 > 
 > 3. While it is downloading, confirm that there is nothing on the webpage to 
 > indicate that this binary contains GPLed software.
 > 
 > 4. Once the download is complete, copy the contents of the file from offset 
 > 0xC0020 onward into a new file.
 >     dd if=WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin of=test.dump skip=24577c bs=32c
 > 
 > 5. Notice that this file is an image of a CramFS filesystem.
 >     Mount it.
 > 
 > 6. Explore the filesystem.  You will notice that the system appears to be 
 > based on Linux 2.4.5.
 >    Incidentally, there is at least one other GPLed project in the firmware: 
 > the BusyBox userland component: (http://www.busybox.net/)
 > 
 > 7. The Linux kernel (I think) is mixed up with a bunch of other stuff in:
 >     bin/boot.bin

Curiously, the Belkin products (http://networking.belkin.com) also seem
to be based upon the same source.  Looks like they could just be
rebranded firmware images with some features disabled.

Additionally, strings(1) output of firmware image may be interesting
to users of their 54g WAPs. Seems it has a lot more html pages inside
than what is documented. The 'low-end' version I bought doesn't mention
anything about firewall, dhcp, dns configuration, or parental controls,
however it's all in there if you know the right URLs. Fun.

		Dave


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
  2003-06-08  3:53 Erik Andersen
@ 2003-06-08 10:08 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
  2003-06-08 12:01   ` Christian Ullrich
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Henning P. Schmiedehausen @ 2003-06-08 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Erik Andersen <andersen@codepoet.org> writes:

>So he has now sent them a second letter...  Assuming we again get
>no response, Linksys is going to find themselves in court in the
>very near future.

Go for it. This might be the acid test to see whether the GPL holds up
in court...

	Regards
		Henning

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen          INTERMETA GmbH
hps@intermeta.de        +49 9131 50 654 0   http://www.intermeta.de/

Java, perl, Solaris, Linux, xSP Consulting, Web Services 
freelance consultant -- Jakarta Turbine Development  -- hero for hire

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-08  3:53 Erik Andersen
  2003-06-08 10:08 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Erik Andersen @ 2003-06-08  3:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

On Sat Jun 07 2003 - 21:41:23 EST, Andrew Miklas wrote:
> Awhile ago, I mentioned that the Linksys WRT54G wireless access
> point used several GPL projects in its firmware, but did not
> seem to have any of the source available, or acknowledge the
> use of the GPLed software.  Four weeks 
[--------snip-----------]

> Incidentally, there is at least one other GPLed project in the
> firmware:
>   the BusyBox userland component: (http://www.busybox.net/) 

<BusyBox maintainer hat on>

I went through a similar exercise several weeks ago when I saw
the thread on the l-k mailing list.  It took just a fix minutes
to extract the linux kernel and cramfs filesystem from their
firmware.  Linksys is indeed shipping BusyBox and the Linux
kernel without releasing source in violation of the GPL.  I had
my lawyer (it helps to have a lawyer for a Dad) send them a
rather polite but firm letter about 3 weeks ago.  No response.
So he has now sent them a second letter...  Assuming we again get
no response, Linksys is going to find themselves in court in the
very near future.

I like Linksys and I have several of their products.  Nobody
forced them to use Linux.  Nobody forced them to use BusyBox.
But when they made the choice to use them, they committed
themselves to abiding by the law.  And the law says then when
companies violate software licenses and don't take care of the
problem when asked politely, they have to pay my Dad lots of
money for the legal time it takes him to sue their pants off...
:-)

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Re: Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-08  3:13 Brad Chapman
  2003-06-08 16:35 ` Davide Libenzi
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 64+ messages in thread
From: Brad Chapman @ 2003-06-08  3:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Mr. Miklas,

I find your discourse on this subject very interesting -- it would
seem you have successfully outlined a double standard that, to me,
does appear to violate the GPL (IANAL).

The question now becomes: Why is Linksys and/or Broadcom doing this?

Brad CHapman

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

* Linksys WRT54G and the GPL
@ 2003-06-08  2:41 Andrew Miklas
  2003-06-08 11:54 ` Dave Jones
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 64+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Miklas @ 2003-06-08  2:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hi,


Sorry for the very lengthly posting, but I want to be as precise as possible 
in describing this problem.

Awhile ago, I mentioned that the Linksys WRT54G wireless access point used 
several GPL projects in its firmware, but did not seem to have any of the 
source available, or acknowledge the use of the GPLed software.  Four weeks 
ago, I spoke with an employee at Linksys who confirmed that the system did 
use Linux, and also mentioned that he would work with his management to 
ensure that the source was released.  Unfortunately, my e-mails to this 
individual over the past three weeks have gone unanswered.  Of course, I also 
tried contacting Linksys through their common public e-mail accounts 
(pr@linksys.com, mailroom@linksys.com) to no avail.

However, it is hard for me to know if my contact in the company has just gone 
on a three week vacation (and not set an auto-responder), or has been asked 
to not answer anymore mail on this subject.  Also, I should note that I don't 
own this product, so I can't determine if the source is shipped with it.  
However, I have gone through all the available information on the Linksys 
website, and can find no reference to the GPL, Linux (as it relates to this 
product), or the firmware source code.  Also, the firmware binary (see below) 
is freely available from their website.  There is no link from the download 
page to the source, or any mention of Linux or the GPL.  Finally, it would be 
strange if the source was included in the physical package, as my contact at 
Linksys was initially unaware Linux was used in this product.



The following steps can be used to determine the exact nature of the possible 
GPL violation.

1. Go to the following URL:
    http://www.linksys.com/download/firmware.asp?fwid=178

2. Download the "firmware upgrade files":     
ftp://ftp.linksys.com/pub/network/WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin
    (MD5SUM: b54475a81bc18462d3754f96c9c7cc0f)

3. While it is downloading, confirm that there is nothing on the webpage to 
indicate that this binary contains GPLed software.

4. Once the download is complete, copy the contents of the file from offset 
0xC0020 onward into a new file.
    dd if=WRT54G_1.02.1_US_code.bin of=test.dump skip=24577c bs=32c

5. Notice that this file is an image of a CramFS filesystem.
    Mount it.

6. Explore the filesystem.  You will notice that the system appears to be 
based on Linux 2.4.5.
   Incidentally, there is at least one other GPLed project in the firmware: 
the BusyBox userland component: (http://www.busybox.net/)

7. The Linux kernel (I think) is mixed up with a bunch of other stuff in:
    bin/boot.bin



You might want to know why I am interested in getting the code for the kernel 
used in this device.

There's been some discussion here about Linux's lack of wireless support for a 
few of the newer 802.11b and (nearly?) all 802.11g chips.  Incidentally, 
Linux has excellent support for at least one manufacturer's wireless family.  
The following Broadcom chips all appear to be supported under Linux -- if you 
happen to be running Linux on a MIPS processor in a Linksys router:

Broadcom BCM4301 Wireless 802.11b Controller
Broadcom BCM4307 Wireless 802.11b Controller
Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11a Controller
Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11b Controller
Broadcom BCM4309 Wireless 802.11 Multiband Controller
Broadcom BCM4310 Wireless 802.11b Controller
Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11b/g Controller
Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11a Controller
Broadcom BCM4306 Wireless 802.11 Multiband Controller

This list was produced by running strings on:
lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/net/wl/wl.o

I am trying to determine exactly how tightly coupled these drivers are to the 
kernel.

As an aside, I know that some wireless companies have been hesitant of 
releasing open source drivers because they are worried their radios might be 
pushed out of spec.  However, if the drivers are already written, would there 
be any technical reason why they could not simply be recompiled for Intel 
hardware, and released as binary-only modules?



Finally, I know that traditionally, Linux has allowed binary-only modules.  
However, I was always under the impression that this required that the final 
customer be allowed to remove them at will.  That is to say, you couldn't 
choose to implement a portion of the kernel critical to the system's 
operation in a module, and then not release that module under the GPL.  In 
this particular case, I would argue that the wireless drivers are critical to 
this device's operation (after all, it is a wireless access point).  In 
addition, the final user in this case really can't just "rmmod" the wireless 
driver.

The Broadcom driver, kernel, and really everything else in the firmware, are 
(IMHO anyways) being used to form a discrete package -- the WRT54Gs firmware.  
Does/should this have any implication on whether the Broadcom wireless module 
must be covered by the GPL?



I would be very interested in knowing if I am mistaken in any of my claims or 
conclusions, and if not, how I should proceed in getting this issue resolved.


-- Andrew Miklas



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 64+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-17 17:52 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 64+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-07-18 23:48 Linksys WRT54G and the GPL root
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-01-17 17:51 nipponmail
2003-06-10  4:11 Russ Dill
2003-06-09 13:13 Downing, Thomas
2003-06-09 16:49 ` Martin List-Petersen
2003-06-09  3:47 Russ Dill
2003-06-09  8:04 ` Russell King
2003-06-09  0:05 Erik Andersen
2003-06-09  3:39 ` John Shifflett
2003-06-09 18:26   ` Alan Cox
2003-06-08 23:35 Erik Andersen
2003-06-09  0:09 ` Paul Jakma
2003-06-09  1:11   ` Erik Andersen
2003-06-08 23:25 Hakan Lennestal
2003-06-08 23:55 ` Martin List-Petersen
2003-06-09  8:47   ` Hakan Lennestal
2003-06-08 20:57 Peter Westwood
2003-06-08 21:52 ` Russell King
2003-06-08 23:18 ` bill-linuxkernel20030609
2003-06-09  0:19 ` Oliver M. Bolzer
2003-06-09  0:31   ` Jeff
2003-06-10 20:43   ` Michael Neuffer
2003-06-08 20:41 greendisease
2003-06-08 21:08 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-08 21:23   ` Jack Aboutboul
2003-06-08 21:50   ` Russell King
2003-06-08 22:48     ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-08  3:53 Erik Andersen
2003-06-08 10:08 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2003-06-08 12:01   ` Christian Ullrich
2003-06-08 13:52     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2003-06-08 14:05       ` Marcus Metzler
2003-06-08 16:49       ` Adrian Bunk
2003-06-08 17:00         ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2003-06-08  3:13 Brad Chapman
2003-06-08 16:35 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-08  2:41 Andrew Miklas
2003-06-08 11:54 ` Dave Jones
2003-06-08 14:23   ` Alan Cox
2003-06-08 18:13   ` uaca
2003-06-08 19:44 ` Colm MacCárthaigh
2003-06-08 20:14   ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-08 21:47   ` Russell King
2003-06-09 22:37   ` Daniel Phillips
2003-06-10 22:47     ` Andrew Miklas
2003-06-11 12:42       ` Alan Cox
2003-06-11 14:28       ` Kent Borg
2003-06-09  5:22 ` Frank Cusack
     [not found]   ` <20030609053010$504e@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-06-09  8:28     ` Florian Weimer
2003-06-09 14:09   ` Horst von Brand
2003-06-09 18:23   ` Alan Cox
2003-06-09 21:33     ` Adrian Bunk
2003-06-09 21:50       ` David Schwartz
2003-06-09 22:21         ` Adrian Bunk
2003-06-10 20:17           ` Randolph Bentson
2003-06-11 15:38             ` Adrian Bunk
2003-06-11 17:39               ` Randolph Bentson
2003-06-11 19:22                 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-06-11 20:12                   ` David Schwartz
2003-06-09  5:32 ` David Schwartz
2003-06-09  5:47   ` Frank Cusack
2003-06-09 16:53     ` David Schwartz
2003-06-09 18:25     ` Alan Cox
2003-06-09 21:37     ` Adrian Bunk

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.