GPL violation?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tompe

Of course they have control over it. They can choose to sell the thing or not. The person having the copyright have not given permission to distribute or sell the thing in that form.

You're not seriously suggesting that Bookeen should stop selling the CyBook because one of their suppliers has a contractual dispute with a third party, are you? That dispute is not of Bookeen's making, and not under their control.

It seems to me that it's rather unreasonable to hold someone responsible for something that they have no control over; if Bookeen are using the hardware and its associated o/s under the terms of a legally arranged contract, it's not Bookeen's "fault" if their supplier hasn't done everything that THEY should have done, is it? For them to "lose out" in a situation in which they are themselves completely blameless is rather an unreasonable thing to suggest, IMHO.

Are you going to stop using your CyBook as a result of this?

[JSWolf]

What Bookeen could do is take a version of Linux and modify it to work with the Gen3 and then they'd have all the code for it and could distribute the code via the GPL.

[dhcalva]

Which would take time away from them fixing the bugs in the current software.

I'd much rather see them make a statement saying 'We'll release the code once the majority of bugs are patched, thus making it safe for release'. I believe, though I could be wrong, that such an act is acceptable.

[igorsk]

By the way, one of the consequences of GPL is that you're allowed to redistribute the binaries. So any firmware update can be shared freely as it includes the Linux kernel.

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It seems to me that it's rather unreasonable to hold someone responsible for something that they have no control over; if Bookeen are using the hardware and its associated o/s under the terms of a legally arranged contract, it's not Bookeen's "fault" if their supplier hasn't done everything that THEY should have done, is it? For them to "lose out" in a situation in which they are themselves completely blameless is rather an unreasonable thing to suggest, IMHO.

Unfortunatelly, I think tompe is right. Bookeen knows their device uses Linux, and they should know that it's GPL and what that means, so they should comply with its license. If they don't, they shouldn't distribute Linux.

Let's say their hardware suppliers embedded not only Linux in the system, but also the latest Shrek movie in divx (without license, of course)... Bookeen wouldn't been responsible for what the suppliers do, but they would be responsible for what they do if they sell this illegal content.

Being realistic, I don't think tompe is asking Bookeen to just drop the Cybook or quit business, but they should try (harder?) to solve this issue either by pressing their suppliers to release the source code or by embedding the OS themselves (and releasing the source code if it's a GPL OS). Until then, they are morally, and probably legally, doing wrong.

[delphidb96]

Has anyone taken their purchased Cybook apart? If so, have they found information as to the manufacturer? Perhaps it is the same manufacturer who creates the Hanlin or the STAReBOOK and perhaps we can then go directly to the manufacturer and ASK them if they are willing to abide by GPL. I don't have a spare Cybook, or I'd do the dirty deed, sacrificing it on the altar of Information.

Derek

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by Jellby

Unfortunatelly, I think tompe is right. Bookeen knows their device uses Linux, and they should know that it's GPL and what that means, so they should comply with its license. If they don't, they shouldn't distribute Linux.

Let's say their hardware suppliers embedded not only Linux in the system, but also the latest Shrek movie in divx (without license, of course)... Bookeen wouldn't been responsible for what the suppliers do, but they would be responsible for what they do if they sell this illegal content.

Being realistic, I don't think tompe is asking Bookeen to just drop the Cybook or quit business, but they should try (harder?) to solve this issue either by pressing their suppliers to release the source code or by embedding the OS themselves (and releasing the source code if it's a GPL OS). Until then, they are morally, and probably legally, doing wrong.

Only if Bookeen knew that the manufacturer had NO INTENTION of releasing the source code for the GPL'd code. What if, and I think this quite possible, the manufacturer has stated to Bookeen that it fully intends to comply? In that case, Bookeen had, and has, every right to sell the device as it is working under the Good Faith presumption the manufacturer will follow through.

Yes, it is Bookeen's responsibility, now that units are hitting store shelves and customers' hands, to work to get the manufacturer to live up to it's GPL obligations, but under the scenario I described, Bookeen has done nothing wrong - and I'm quite willing to accept the notion Bookeen worked under these assumptions.

Derek

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by tompe

I think they were aware of the problem. Signing a NDA for Linux code should have triggered a lot of questions. That was why I was surprised that they did not provide the OS themselves to get around these kind of problems.

The GPL is a "viral" license: code that links against GPL code becomes GPL in consequence.

But this only covers code that links against GPL code. Code that simply runs under Linux does not become GPL, and can be closed source and proprietary.

The question is exactly what was covered by the NDA Bookeen signed.

And you are wrong. It is also Bookeen that is in violation. It is they that are sellling the unit.

Splendid. Now, find someone with money who feels strongly enough about this to hire a lawyer and take Bookeen to court. Good luck.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

What Bookeen could do is take a version of Linux and modify it to work with the Gen3 and then they'd have all the code for it and could distribute the code via the GPL.

Does Bookeen have someone on staff who can do that? If not, can they afford to pay a porting specialist to do it?

My guess is no to both questions.
______
Dennis

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Does Bookeen have someone on staff who can do that? If not, can they afford to pay a porting specialist to do it?

My guess is no to both questions.
______
Dennis

There are actually several quite good implementations of Embedded Linux available for the processor used on the Cybook. It probably wouldn't take too much effort to create a specific version from those. However, I'd say that Bookeen probably should concentrate upon getting the application software up to speed before making a run at re-working the OS.

Derek

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, you've misunderstood me. I absolutely do NOT condone non-compliance with the GPL. You say it's "criminal behaviour" - is the GPL actually enforced by criminal law? I would have thought it more likely that it's covered by civil contract law than by any criminal law, but I'm not a lawyer, obviously, so I could be wrong!

AFAIK, it's contract law, and therein lies the problem. It's not like a violation of criminal law where you can point the police at it and say "Sic 'em!" Someone would actually have to spend the money to hire lawyers go to court over this. I don't see anyone stepping forward to do so, so in practical terms, the whole discussion is moot.

I don't see Bookeen ceasing sales of the Cybook because of a GPL violation -- it is how they make their living -- and I'm not sure what Bookeen can do to compel their supplier to comply with the terms of the GPL. They are probably buying Cybooks from an unnamed Chinese manufacturer. Go ahead. Take the supplier to court in China over GPL violations. See how far you get.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

There are actually several quite good implementations of Embedded Linux available for the processor used on the Cybook. It probably wouldn't take too much effort to create a specific version from those. However, I'd say that Bookeen probably should concentrate upon getting the application software up to speed before making a run at re-working the OS.

Shouldn't take too much effort, if you are someone who knows how to do that.

Same question: does Bookeen have that someone, or can they pay someone who does? An available embedded Linux kernel for the processor helps, but isn't a full solution. Drivers will likely be a much larger concern.

Derek

______
Dennis

[ashalan]

... all I really want is an SDK

[ashalan]

... all I really want is an SDK

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Jellby

Being realistic, I don't think tompe is asking Bookeen to just drop the Cybook or quit business, but they should try (harder?) to solve this issue either by pressing their suppliers to release the source code or by embedding the OS themselves (and releasing the source code if it's a GPL OS).

Yes, and they are probably doing that and I hope they are successful and I realize they had practial concerns and I can respect them but then I have to respect (which I do) other practical concerns such that people download copyrighted material for practical reasons.

I feel pretty strongly that you should respect the GPL since I think the goal of it is very good. In this thread I just got irritaded that the same persons that complains about distributing copyrighted material suddenly think that it is not such a big problem. Protecting companies possibility to earn money seems to be more important than protecting the free distribution of knowledge and information.

I realized that if you only care about strict legality you might sell you Cybook where you have erased the firmware.