Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Are Third-Party Android Vendors Violating the GPL?

Posted by timothy on from the checking-it-twice dept.

jfruhlinger writes "Google's refusal to not release Honeycomb source code is kosher because the code in question is released under the Apache license. But the kernel at the heart of Android is GPL'd, which means that code must be released. Google has actually been a good citizen in this regard — but many third-party Android vendors, not so much. While Asus has released their code, there are a host of companies that seem to have not done so, and Matthew Garrett is maintaining a list."

1 of 132 comments (clear)

  1. A more concise summary by girlintraining · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Fact 1: GPL requires source code to be released.
    Fact 2: License does not specify when it has to be released.

    Reaction: ZOMFG, they're violating the license! Raise the pitch forks and aaaaah. Burn them at the stake! Open source means xyzzy, and stuff, and and and... it's just wrong

    Rational Resolution: Update the license to have a reasonable time constraint.

    Irrational Resolution: Google is evil and must be punished.

    We now return you to your regularly scheduled flamefest, already in progress.....

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie