Sellers of chinese tablets

[xaueious]

We need to know that we are dealing with at least 3 cases when it comes to
'manufacturers':
1) manufacturers without access to source code since they are only
responsible for assembly
2) SoC turnkey providers with full or partial access to source code
3) Chinese branches of foreign SoC manufacturers
4) Chinese SoC manufacturers

It only makes sense to deal with cases 2/3. With case 2, these providers
are more difficult to target. You should be able to get case 3. Case 4
usually operate by copyright infringement by principle, and don't care
about the GPL. Popular platforms for 2-4 are turnkey solutions, where the
electronic and software design is done away from the actual assembler.

For example:
Amlogic Shenzhen/Shanghai contact: http://www.amlogic.com/contact01.htm
Telechips Shenzhen contact: http://www.telechips.com/eng/util/contact.asp
Qualcomm China: http://www.qualcomm.com/about/buildings/offices#China

You can actually give these offices a call and see what they say. They will
probably ignore you, but you will need to document this and then
subsequently contact their headoffice.

The majority of sellers know that their products do not qualify for the
proper safety and regulatory regulations of the target country they are
either exporting or importing to. As such, you cannot expect they to abide
by the law either.

(hit wrong button. sorry Luke)

On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 4:52 AM, lkcl luke <luke.leighton at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Till Harbaum / Lists <lists at harbaum.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > imho the GPL requires anyone distributing GPL based binaries to comply
> with the GPL, right? So the seller of those chinese tablets that come with
> a android kernel without source has to give me the source code.
> >
> > Of course the seller probably has no access to the source code. But
> since we have no way to approach the vendors the sellers are the only link.
> >
> > What if one orders those illegal tablets from china via ebay+paypal and
> then demands the source? One could even cancel the payment since the device
> received contains stuff the seller has no license for.
>
>  i have heard about doing this sort of thing in europe, where it is a
> legal requirement to refund product if unsatisfactory, within 10
> working days.  illegal licenses would more than adequately qualify.
>
> > These sellers seem to be very afraid of negative reviews. May this be a
> useful way to apply some force? If this starts to happen often enough, then
> this may actually turn out to be a threat to the vendors as well.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
>  the chain is longer than you think, and the sheer number of sellers
> beyond the capacity to deal with.  all that a seller in china need do
> is shut up shop and start a new account.
>
>  with even google's top open source evangelist declaring that "google
> is not the world's GPL cops", thus losing google their right to defend
> their own copyright material against an estoppel defense, there really
> isn't any point in pursuing GPL Linux Kernel violations any more.
>
>  l.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/legal/attachments/20120408/2a5fec86/attachment.htm>