Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice)

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:56 AM, BRM <bm_witness@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----
>
> > From: Simos Xenitellis <simos.lists@googlemail.com>
> > To: discuss@documentfoundation.org
> > Sent: Thu, June 16, 2011 6:31:25 PM
> > Subject: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re:
> > [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice)
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu,  Jun 16, 2011 at 17:54, Simos Xenitellis
> > > <simos.lists@googlemail.com>  wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > > The key thing being "that person". That  person is most likely not You,
> > > > > the developer who is contributing  to the software. Thus, You won't get
> > > > > those changes unless "that  person" decides to pass them back to you.
> > > > >
> > > > > So you  don't necessarily have a "right" to the code. You are relying
> > > > > on  the goodwill of "that person" to help you out. Of course, they
> > > > >  might not even know who you are. They might not care. They might  not
> > > > > ever ask for the source  code.
> > > >
> > > > It's a common misconception. If a  TV uses Linux (most LCD/LED TV use
> > Linux),
> > > > you do not need to show  evidence you bought one in order to ask for
> > > > the Linux source  code.
> > > >
> > > > See the GPLv2 (per Linux kernel) license  text,
> > > >  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt
> > > >
> > > >  “Accompany it with a 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,”
> > >
> > > That written offer  goes to the recipient (your statement comes from
> > > 3(b), which is  dependent upon the primary part of (3), which talks
> > > about distributions  to a recipient). The recipient does not need to
> > > transfer or pass that  offer to third parties.
> >
> > Here is the full sentence, omitting some  details for clarity:
> >
> > a. You [i.e. manufacturer, etc] may copy and  distribute the Program,
> > b. in object code or executable form
> > c. provided  that you also
> > d. accompany it with a written offer
> > e. to give **any**  third party
> > f. a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source  code
> >
> > > Again, you're relying on the goodwill of the recipient to get  changes
> > returned.
> > >
> >
> > Anyone can get a copy of the source code for  copyleft software.
>
> Please read:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#RedistributedBinariesGetSource
>
> Directly from the FSF, authors of the GPL. You must have a copy of the written
> offer in order to be entitled to receipt of the source.
>
> > Tell me which LCD/LED TV  you have (brand,  model), and I'll get for
> > you the source code (of the copyleft)  software.
>
> Only if you also have a copy of the written offer are they required to do so.
> See above.

So, what you are telling me is that if a manufacturer is already
violating the GPL,
then a third party cannot ask for the source code?
Is this a claim that the GPL is not enforceable?

If a product is violating the GPL, then you can ask
http://gpl-violations.org/ for assistance
so that the manufacturer makes available the source code as required,
for the full range of products.

For my TV, I click on
a. Yellow button (documentation)
b. (It's already on the Get started menu)
c. Select "Open source Licenses".

That's it.

Simos

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted