Slashdot Mirror
GP2X Linux Handheld Makers Don't Understand GPL
Bjimba writes "Apparently, the developer community is having a lot of trouble convincing the makers of the GP2X Linux handheld to comply with the GPL by releasing source at the same time as binary firmware releases. This link leads to a synopsis of the issue, and yes, it's my own blog, but there's no ads."
Does that mean that the collective geekiness of slashdot can sue them if they don't comply? How does the GPL get enforced?
-Dipster
I couldn't agree more. I've worked for types of people like this. Always trying to find some way around the licensing agreement for software that they receive for FREE. In my opinion, this is tantamount to stealing from a charity.
I'm sure they understand, too. What's more, I'm sure that they also understand that others are getting away with the same illegal actions everyday, without facing any legal ramnifications. And this is the real problem: NOBODY WHO MATTERS IS DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT. The GPL needs to be tested in court.
And to think that I wanted to buy one of these. Now, I just want them to comply or fry.
...
This may seem offtopic, but does anyone know if this company has paid the proper royalties to be able to sell a device that plays MP3 and WMA out of the box? From a company that feels like it can do what it's doing with GPL-ed software, it wouldn't surprise me if they haven't.
The copyright holders should a preliminary injunction halting the distribution of the device in the US. That will get their attention. I suspect that once they have been served, they will comply quickly.
> A company released hardware that makes it easy and convenient to run all your favorite
> emulated copyright violations on portable hardware.
If you aren't Nintendo or Sony and want to launch a new handheld, your initial titles are going to be the easy ones, i.e. ports of existing titles. A port of MAME gets you a buttload of stuff for people to play with. If it is to survive beyond being a toy for a few leet types more content will be needed.
Sounds kinda interesting, but like the new Nokia gadget, not quite where I'm ready to drop the cash yet.
Democrat delenda est
All the text says the device is called the GP2x but if you go to their website http://www.gpx2.co.uk/ you can clearly see the units logo says GPX2 but the website and literature says GP2X.. its so confusing.. is this even dodgier than first assumed?
-Sj53
I don't know about China but it seemed that at least in my experiences, the big companies in Korea are cognizant about GPL licensing issues and are pretty good at complying with the license.
l (pretty decent product, although concept-wise, it is a knock off of japanese products)
For example, when I was working there a year ago
(1) Korea-equivalent of BSA would conduct random audits of software licenses. Actually one consulting company that my company hired had to stop working for couple days because apparently they didn't have proper number of licenses for Visual Studio. The company I worked for also ran in-house audits from time to time to detect not only licensed software but unauthorized software like MSN, mp3, etc.
(2) The company actually had an entire group devote to GPL and there were several initiatives to educate engineers and product planners about various licenses including GPL (I attended several presentations on it) and I belive we also purchased (or acquired) several software that was supposed to detect presense of popular GPL software in our sources.
(3) Engineers and markets usually talked and argued about including GPL stuff in the product we developed. We would usualy opt for commercial libraries because we usually didn't want to go through the hassle (we were big enough not to care about costs most of the time - if we had to think about cost, it probably meant that marketing guys weren't doing a good job in product planning)
(4) Last group that I worked in actually forbade usage of linux because of GPL license and we spent couple mil buying commerical RTOS and was in the process of coverting linux to that OS.
So, while I don't think Korean companies are up to standards of U.S. companies, I think it is a mischaracterization that all Asian countries don't care shit about IP stuff. Maybe private citizens might not care (there weren't too many cases of Korean-equivilant of RIAA suing people but Korea is a much less-litigious society) but I think most companies by far are pretty good about complying with GPL.
For example: http://opensrc.sec.samsung.com/ has the sources for linux used in this product: http://linuxdevices.com/articles/AT7933085076.htm
The reason why Korean companies would care is that while chances are low they will be sued in Korea, they will be sued in U.S. and almost all companies need to sell their crap in U.S. to make money. So basically U.S. law becomes more-or-less de facto "international" law.
I posted above with gnu address for gpl violations. Also found an interesting looking site, HackersLab.org at least the link to the Korean page looks like there are people who might listen to what you want to say. They are doing security and hacking of some time and maybe if there are bugs on this device it could be a security problem and that would also be up their alley? Good luck.
Matt
That makes no difference. There is a legal duty to defend your trademarks in order to prevent them from being diluted or becoming common words. However, there is no such duty to defend copyright. The best example of this is "Happy Birthday" which was publically performed without royalty payments for something like 40 years before the copyright owner finally decided to start suing restaraunts and other venues that performed it without authorization. The rightsholders are raking in the dough to this day, despite their half century slumber.
Make cheese not war 8:)
They ported it to a new system. Methinks that requires a bit more than a recompile...
I respond to your sigs