OC please steal

  • Vuraniute@thelemmy.clubEnglish
    3·
    3 months ago

    Not only TiVO, IIRC Tecno (the phone company) is in violation of the GPL-2.0 too by not providing device trees.

    • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
      1·
      3 months ago

      Speaking of violators, North Korea is in violation of GPL 2.0 since they didn’t provide me the source code of the kernel when I asked for them for it.

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        0·
        3 months ago

        Did you get a kernel binary from them? If not, I don’t think they’re bound to you by GPL.

  • mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org
    1·
    3 months ago

    I love one of the clauses of gplv3 where if a user does not follow the gpl you may deny them their ability to use it forever.

    Would be funny to strike Nintendo with that. Or any other company that likes suing people work.

  • Arthur Besse@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1·
    3 months ago

    What a confused image.

    1. TiVo complied with the GPLv2 and distributed source code for their modifications to Linux. What they did not do was distribute the cryptographic keys which would allow TiVo customers to run modified versions it on their TiVo devices. This is what motivated the so-called anti-tivoization clause in GPLv3 (the “Installation Information” part of Section 6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.).
    2. Linux remains GPLv2, so, everyone today still has the right to do the same thing TiVo did (shipping it in a product with a locked bootloader).
    3. Distributing Linux (or any GPLv2 software) with a threat of violence against recipients who exercise some of the rights granted by the license, as is depicted in this post, would be a violation section 6 of GPLv2 (“You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients’ exercise of the rights granted herein.”).