GPL license compliance clarification [embedded Linux]

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi Iain,

> This is a Linux device, which is distributed with an embedded flash
> and a CD, each containing pre-compiled binaries for various GPL
> components.
>
> It includes at least the following binaries:
>
> U-Boot-1.1.3
> BusyBox v1.00
> Linux 2.6.16.27
>
> As far as I can see from initial inspection of the CD and printed docs
> shipped with the product, it contain no copy of GPL license, no
> corresponding source code for these GPL components, and no written
> mail-order offer to obtain the source code.

As it seems you know, they must follow one of 3(a), 3(b), or 3(c), and
it seems they aren't.

> The proprietary license on the Digium CD does identify the GPL, it
> says:
>
> "you acknowledge that certain components of the Software may be
> covered by so-called "open source" software licenses ("Open Source
> Components"). Digium will provide a list of Open Source Components for
> a particular version of the Software upon your request.  To the extent
> required by the licenses covering Open Source Components, the terms of
> such licenses will apply in lieu of the terms of this Agreement, and
> Digium hereby represents and warrants that the licenses granted to
> such Open Source Components will be no less broad than the license
> granted in this Section 2. To the extent the terms of the licenses
> applicable to Open Source Components prohibit any of the restrictions
> in this Agreement with respect to such Open Source Component, such
> restrictions will not apply to such Open Source Component."
>
> My question is, does that meet the terms of the GPL ?

I'd say not.  IANAL.

> Specifically, does it constitute "a written offer... for the complete
> machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code" per section 3
> of the GPL ?

No.  It just seems to be saying that the Open Source licenses offer no
less rights than Digium's section 2, and where an OS license offers more
rights then you still have them for that particular bit of software.

> ps. Yes, I know Digium are a GPL-friendly company and that all/most of
> this source code is publicly available from various servers already.

That's not the point.  They need to tell people the freedoms they have
WRT the GNU GPL'd software.

> For example the box contains a 'premium login' sheet with details for
> Digiums developer website. I'm not on a vendetta, but I plan to use
> this box as a completely open platform so I chose not to register at
> their site, and I should not need to do so in order to exercise my
> rights under the GPL.

If they've shipped you the binaries under a commercial arrangement then
they must ship you the source, either under 3(a) at the time of shipping
the binaries, or 3(b) at your request.

It's probably cock-up over conspiracy but please persue it.  You may
also wish to inform the Freedom Task Force.  I'm not saying you'll get a
reply or they'll do anything, but bringing it to their attention would
seem worthwhile.

    http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/ftf/ftf.en.html
    http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/ftf/enforcement.en.html

Cheers,


Ralph.