View Single Post
Old 11-03-2012, 03:22 PM   #58
dos1
20% cooler.
dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dos1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
dos1's Avatar
 
Posts: 93
Karma: 364674
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Poznań, Poland
Device: Kindle Paperwhite 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by knc1 View Post
What part of "or their appointed agent" would you like me to explain to you?

PS:
The subject you started this with was my comment about it does not say "when".

Now you are starting to drift onto another subject, about wither or not they are in violation of the license agreement.
Yes, it's natural drift, as it's already settled that it *does* say when - on release. On release you should have offer available, saying how to obtain source code. As it's "written offer", it should for instance also say how long it would take to get it if it would travel through traditional mail (but right, license does not require that). When providing URL, there's of course no need for that.

Here it doesn't matter at all, as there is no such offer, so GPL is already violated.

And it's not hard to get in touch with some "appointed agent", for instance of Busybox developers (Busybox is used on Kindle), as eureka already quoted. In my opinion we should do that if they won't provide source in ~2-3 months. Now I would give them some time, that doesn't seem to be bad intentions, just some organizational thing.

Last edited by dos1; 11-03-2012 at 03:31 PM.
dos1 is offline   Reply With Quote