Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by jra_samba | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

jra_samba

Full legal text of the complaint:

https://sfconservancy.org/docs/conservancy-v-vizio-original-...

Press kit:

https://shoestring.agency/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/SFC_Pre...

View on HN

Full legal text of the complaint:

https://sfconservancy.org/docs/conservancy-v-vizio-original-...

Paragraphs 37 and 38 list the relevant software packages. Strangely the PDF is a scan. The OCR / embedded text isn't complete so there are some parts missing below...

37. Among the computer programs that comprise SmartCast are a number of programs 15 subject to the GPLv2:

(a) The Linux kernel. A kernel is the heart of an operating system, which all computerized devices, like smart TV s, require in order to function. The Linux kernel is one of the most popular operating system kernels.

(b) alsa-utils, which is a suite of programs that assist and manage ALSA, Linux's audio subsystem.

(c) GNU bash, which is a " shell," a program that allows users to interface with the operating system and is required for most operating systems.

(d) GNU awk, which is a popular scripting language with many uses.

(e) bluez, which is a suite of programs that assist and manage Bluetooth for Linux ased devices.

(f) BusyBox, which is a popular "thin footprint" suite of utilities for Linux.

(g) coreutils, which is a popular suite of utilities for Linux, with a larger "footprint" than BusyBox

38. Among the computer programs that comprise SmartCast are a number of programs subject to the LGPLv2.1:

(a) The GNU C Library, which is a library of resources that allows Linux users to program in the popular C and C++ programming languages. It would be required for any Linux14 based operating system that wished to take advantage of these popular programming languages.

(b)

(c)

(d) hardware.

(e) ffmpeg, which is a suite of libraries for handling audio, video, and multimedia. glib, which is a library that facilitates programming in C. DirectFB, which is a library that allows Linux-based systems to work with video libasound, which is a library that helps third-party programs interact with ALSA, Linux's audio subsystem.

(f) libelf, which is a library for reading and modifying binary files.

(g)

(h) file systems.

(i) libgcrypt, which is a C programming library of encryption functions and utilities. libmount, which is a library that helps third-party programs interact with Linux libnl, which is a suite of libraries related to using netlink, a popular network communication protocol.

(j) selinux libraries, which help third-party programs interact with selinux.

(k) systemd, which is a large system that manages, organizes and handles shutdown and restarting of system services on a Linux-based system.

Good point that Linux kernel is GPL - how can companies sell products with an embedded Linux then? They don't seem to be publishing sources.

Basically anything IoT more advanced than a thermometer seems to be running Linux.

The Software Freedom Conservancy has a page on exactly this:

https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/firmware-liber...

Technically the GPLv2 only requires you to provide source on request from someone who received the binaries, it doesn't require companies to proactively publish it. I think the GPLv3 changes this slightly

GPLv2 requires you to either proactively provide the source or proactively provide a written offer to provide source on request to any third party (section 3 of the GPLv2) - simply distributing binaries without including either source or an offer is technically a breach of license.

Reacting to requests is not sufficient, you have to inform the recipient that they actually are entitled to make those requests and provide a promise that those requests will be honored.

Back around 2012 my company was preparing an embedded system. The day the license was added one of our tester found the section about sending $5 to whatever address to get that source code. He sent the letter with his $5 and it came back return to sender. Even though this was an internal only release (most of the functions weren't even written yet) our lawyers made us go through the entire recall process to replace all the code the testers were working with - to show good faith just in case something more happened.

They only need to provide the sources for the kernel, not the software running on top of the kernel. Usually they do publish the source for their kernel somewhere on their website in my experience (although they don't always provide a direct link to it on the product).

It’s because they know Linus doesn’t care about software freedom[1] and it’s difficult to find kernel devs willing to sue when they know the boss doesn’t want them to.

[1] e.g. when TiVo violated the GPL he let them, because apparently they found a loophole. When FSF closed the loophole definitively in GPLv3 he refused to adopt it. Also he grumbles about Nvidia but he was the one who created the weird loophole that “some parts of the kernel aren’t gpl” specifically to allow them to violate GPL so Linux could have their drivers.

The Software Freedom Conservancy represents a coalition of Linux kernel developers who are willing to sue despite Linus' opinions.

[1] is incorrect, what TiVo did (disabling the proprietary software on your device when you modify the GPL software) is allowed even by GPLv3, even though RMS did want to prevent the possibility of that. Also, the requirement to allow software reinstall is there even in GPLv2.

https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017... https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t...

> Also, the requirement to allow software reinstall is there even in GPLv2.

>> a key reason that the GPLv2 was created, is the software freedom to reinstall a modified version.

Would that mean e.g. Apple is breaking the GPL by including GPLv2 components in iOS and not letting me reinstall modified versions of those components on my iPhone?

Which GPL components are there in iOS?

I don’t know, but System Presences > General > About > Legal contains copies of GPLv2.

Edit: Ohhh, I think they might all be lgpl. Or, one is for libstdc++ but it mentions some special exemption?

> Would that mean e.g. Apple is breaking the GPL by including GPLv2 components in iOS and not letting me reinstall modified versions of those components on my iPhone?

If Apple were including GPLv2 components in iOS, yes. Why do you think all the Apple userland is based on BSD?

It’s scanned because those are the filed copied (with signatures), not the (literal) preprint.

Irrelevant, but (a) is technically incorrect. 'computerized devices, like smart TV s', do not necessarily require an "operating system" in order to function. If you removed the comma between 'devices' and 'like', then I think this would be correct.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com