GP2X Linux Handheld Makers Don't Understand GPL 284
Bjimba writes "Apparently, the developer community is having a lot of trouble convincing the makers of the GP2X Linux handheld to comply with the GPL by releasing source at the same time as binary firmware releases. This link leads to a synopsis of the issue, and yes, it's my own blog, but there's no ads."
Violated? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:they don't understand? (Score:1, Interesting)
I'm sure they understand, too. What's more, I'm sure that they also understand that others are getting away with the same illegal actions everyday, without facing any legal ramnifications. And this is the real problem: NOBODY WHO MATTERS IS DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT. The GPL needs to be tested in court.
And to think that I wanted to buy one of these. Now, I just want them to comply or fry.
WMA? (Score:3, Interesting)
how to get them to comply (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Gee, color me surprised! (Score:3, Interesting)
> emulated copyright violations on portable hardware.
If you aren't Nintendo or Sony and want to launch a new handheld, your initial titles are going to be the easy ones, i.e. ports of existing titles. A port of MAME gets you a buttload of stuff for people to play with. If it is to survive beyond being a toy for a few leet types more content will be needed.
Sounds kinda interesting, but like the new Nokia gadget, not quite where I'm ready to drop the cash yet.
Serious question (Score:1, Interesting)
-Sj53
Re:Only to be expected (Score:5, Interesting)
For example, when I was working there a year ago
(1) Korea-equivalent of BSA would conduct random audits of software licenses. Actually one consulting company that my company hired had to stop working for couple days because apparently they didn't have proper number of licenses for Visual Studio. The company I worked for also ran in-house audits from time to time to detect not only licensed software but unauthorized software like MSN, mp3, etc.
(2) The company actually had an entire group devote to GPL and there were several initiatives to educate engineers and product planners about various licenses including GPL (I attended several presentations on it) and I belive we also purchased (or acquired) several software that was supposed to detect presense of popular GPL software in our sources.
(3) Engineers and markets usually talked and argued about including GPL stuff in the product we developed. We would usualy opt for commercial libraries because we usually didn't want to go through the hassle (we were big enough not to care about costs most of the time - if we had to think about cost, it probably meant that marketing guys weren't doing a good job in product planning)
(4) Last group that I worked in actually forbade usage of linux because of GPL license and we spent couple mil buying commerical RTOS and was in the process of coverting linux to that OS.
So, while I don't think Korean companies are up to standards of U.S. companies, I think it is a mischaracterization that all Asian countries don't care shit about IP stuff. Maybe private citizens might not care (there weren't too many cases of Korean-equivilant of RIAA suing people but Korea is a much less-litigious society) but I think most companies by far are pretty good about complying with GPL.
For example: http://opensrc.sec.samsung.com/ [samsung.com] has the sources for linux used in this product: http://linuxdevices.com/articles/AT7933085076.htm
The reason why Korean companies would care is that while chances are low they will be sued in Korea, they will be sued in U.S. and almost all companies need to sell their crap in U.S. to make money. So basically U.S. law becomes more-or-less de facto "international" law.
Hackerslab (Score:3, Interesting)
Matt
Re:they don't understand? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:how do we know... (Score:2, Interesting)