Related
So I figured I would document my attempts at getting HTC to release the CDMA Hero kernel source. Hopefully everyone else can document their attempts as well.
Today, 12-30-09, I contacted HTC through email and was in conversation with a gentleman named Tony. He informed me I should call them. I called them and spoke with a gentleman named Fam. After being on the phone for a half hour he informed me that the CDMA kernel was licensed under the Apache license. Obviously this did not make sense so I asked why the GSM kernel would be licensed under GPL and CDMA under Apache. He stumbled over his words, not giving me an answer. He said to check developer.android.com for the information he found but I wasnt able to. I think it's a bunch of BS. Anyone else have better or different experiences?
I emailed them a few days ago & got:
Code:
Dear,
The HTC Customer Service Representative that has been handling your message would like to know if your question has been successfully answered. You can reply to or close your question by visiting:
http://ContactUs.htc.com/wFrmMailLogin.aspx
Ticket Number : [ 09USCW52ENA000753 ]
If you do not respond to or close your question within 15 days, it will be closed automatically.
Sincerely,
HTC
We are unable to receive replies to this email account. Please visit us at www.htc.com if you have any questions or need further assistance.
New Response From [ Mario (North America Support (Tech)) ]
Dear Customer,
Thank you for contacting HTC!
Unfortunately HTC has not released the source code for the CDMA Hero. We have no information on future releases.
We suggest checking our website periodically for updates.
Sincerely,
HTC Support.
Customer Information
Name
Telephone
Email Address
Country United States
Inquiry Information
Inquiry Type Technical Support
Inquiry Description I would like to request the kernel source for the CDMA based Hero. I know the GSM based Hero source has has been released, but I want/need the CDMA based source.
Issue Date & Time
2009/12/23 08:03
chuckhriczko said:
After being on the phone for a half hour he informed me that the CDMA kernel was licensed under the Apache license. Obviously this did not make sense so I asked why the GSM kernel would be licensed under GPL and CDMA under Apache.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Linux kernel is most definitely NOT licensed under the Apache license, obviously. I believe much of Android is, however. Perhaps Tony referred to the kernel by mistake.
In my opinion this is getting rather serious. Code is to be available upon request IMMEDIATELY once a shipping GPL-based binary is out (for sale or otherwise). It is not optional for HTC as it is not their code! They are build a business on the backs of thousands of developers who gave their hard work to Linux in good faith. Apart from this copyright infringement, it pretty much defeats the whole purpose of an open source OS, leaving us to hack our phones device-by-device rather than making changes that can benefit everyone.
I have written to them several times before...and I must admit that my most recent contacts have done away with the please's and thank-you's. I think chuckhriczko is right to start documenting our contacts.
Where did all the GSM people send their complaints to?
where do we send these complaints?
I'd like to join in.
surrealbliss said:
where do we send these complaints?
I'd like to join in.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HERE
This silly game is pissing me off
If the GSM Hero source is released it makes no sense for the wait. I e-mailed HTC and will post when I receve a reply.
I just e-mailed them with the help from 5tr4t4s comment here (just changed a few words around).
Here is my e-mail to them
I am writing you in an attemt to get the linux kernel that should be available upon request, BY LAW!!!!
I believe much of the Android os is, however the Linux kernel is most definitely NOT licensed under the Apache license.
In my opinion this is getting rather serious. Code is to be available upon request IMMEDIATELY once a shipping GPL-based binary is out (for sale or otherwise). It is not optional for you(HTC) as it is not your code! You are a business built on the backs of thousands of developers who gave their hard work to Linux in good faith. Apart from this copyright infringement, it pretty much defeats the whole purpose of an open source OS, leaving us to hack our phones device-by-device rather than making changes that can benefit everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If and when i get a reply i will update with their response.
this is what i got.
Hello Justin,
The source that we have available for the HTC Hero can be found at developer.htc.com. The Android operating system does not fall under the GPL but under version 2 of the Apache License agreement (Apache2). Under the Apache2, HTC is required to give the source code of the operating system that was modified to work on the phone. Any closed source files that are part of a program that is installed on and not part of the operating system are allowed to be removed from the source code that is provided by the Licenser. The file you are trying to find by referencing the GPL is a closed source file that is provided by Sprint to “install” the settings of the network into the phone so the software of the phone can communicate properly with the hardware of the phone. Therefore, the source kernel that we provide on our developer website follows the Apache2 guidelines. You may contact Sprint to see if they host a different kernel for the Sprint Hero or you can go to the Android Developer website for more information on Android. I have listed below the Android Open Source Licensing FAQ website, an article that is suggested to by the Android developers on why they chose Apache2 over the GPLv2, and a link to the Apache2 Terms and Conditions.
http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/faq/licensingandoss.html
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/...se-the-apache-software-license-over-gplv2.ars
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Philip
HTC Technical Support
www.htc.com
WTF?!?
justinisyoung said:
Hello Justin,
The source that we have available for the HTC Hero can be found at developer.htc.com. The Android operating system does not fall under the GPL but under version 2 of the Apache License agreement (Apache2). Under the Apache2, HTC is required to give the source code of the operating system that was modified to work on the phone. Any closed source files that are part of a program that is installed on and not part of the operating system are allowed to be removed from the source code that is provided by the Licenser. The file you are trying to find by referencing the GPL is a closed source file that is provided by Sprint to “install” the settings of the network into the phone so the software of the phone can communicate properly with the hardware of the phone. Therefore, the source kernel that we provide on our developer website follows the Apache2 guidelines. You may contact Sprint to see if they host a different kernel for the Sprint Hero or you can go to the Android Developer website for more information on Android. I have listed below the Android Open Source Licensing FAQ website, an article that is suggested to by the Android developers on why they chose Apache2 over the GPLv2, and a link to the Apache2 Terms and Conditions.
http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/faq/licensingandoss.html
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/...se-the-apache-software-license-over-gplv2.ars
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Philip
HTC Technical Support
www.htc.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, the Ars Technica article he links even states the kernel is released under GPLv2, such BS.
gu1dry said:
Um, the Ars Technica article he links even states the kernel is released under GPLv2, such BS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah... i was wondering if that guy even read what he linked to. probably googled some random **** and just linked it.
gu1dry said:
Um, the Ars Technica article he links even states the kernel is released under GPLv2, such BS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wtf is wrong with them. Its like pulling teeth with these people to get what we paid for
I am not a legal person at all so I'm not going to debate if what they are doing is legal or illegal.
Buuuttt.. i do want to add my opinion. From my experiences with linux and gpl and whatnot.... I think HTC should have the right to keep the portion of code they worked on closed source. Show what they modified but not how exactly they modified it.
Just because you change or add code to an software base that's open and free doesn't mean your work gets donated to the world. I belive you should willingly open your code, but not be legally forced into doing so.
There are plenty of companies out there that release what they use in a very similar fasion, roku and apple to name a few. They don't release the source of the portion they modified but they tell you what they modified.... and post the source of what was modified, *before* the made the changes.
http://www.roku.com/support/gpl_rdvp
http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/iphone-312/
unless you're a lawyer.... making claims or demanding something from a big company like this... I belive alot of people will be kind to know that you're probally just talking out your butt. No offence to anyone that stands behind open source.... but I hear alot of backyard courtroom talk like this in my field of work and I just smile and nod the entire time, and take heed no to take anything they say too seriously.
If you make a claim, expecially when it comes to legal stuff, make sure you bring it with the quotes references & citations of where exactly someone is breaking the law.
justinisyoung said:
this is what i got.
Hello Justin,
The source that we have available for the HTC Hero can be found at developer.htc.com. The Android operating system does not fall under the GPL but under version 2 of the Apache License agreement (Apache2). Under the Apache2, HTC is required to give the source code of the operating system that was modified to work on the phone. Any closed source files that are part of a program that is installed on and not part of the operating system are allowed to be removed from the source code that is provided by the Licenser. The file you are trying to find by referencing the GPL is a closed source file that is provided by Sprint to “install” the settings of the network into the phone so the software of the phone can communicate properly with the hardware of the phone. Therefore, the source kernel that we provide on our developer website follows the Apache2 guidelines. You may contact Sprint to see if they host a different kernel for the Sprint Hero or you can go to the Android Developer website for more information on Android. I have listed below the Android Open Source Licensing FAQ website, an article that is suggested to by the Android developers on why they chose Apache2 over the GPLv2, and a link to the Apache2 Terms and Conditions.
http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/faq/licensingandoss.html
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/...se-the-apache-software-license-over-gplv2.ars
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Philip
HTC Technical Support
www.htc.com
WTF?!?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So it looks like they said the same thing to you as they said to me. "Philip" contradicted himself saying that the kernel is HTCs closed source code (which it is not) but then goes on to say that Sprint must release the kernel? If it's closed source why would Sprint have it? Because it's not. I actually went the other route to avoid the Sprint issue. I told the guy I had a Droid Eris and asked for the kernel knowing full well it is the same kernel for both phones. The guy avoided the Sprint issue but still held onto the "closed source" bs. So with that it appears they will never release the source code. If this is the case what legal action could we bring against them. I love HTCs phones but, being a linux guy, it disgusts me how they are trying to benefit from the open source movement but not give back. It's like if Canonical didnt release Ubuntu's source code. It's international law!
If these attempts don't get resolved this could be something the eff might get involved in. Just a thought at least.
http://www.eff.org/
Bnick007
johnsongrantr said:
I am not a legal person at all so I'm not going to debate if what they are doing is legal or illegal.
Buuuttt.. i do want to add my opinion. From my experiences with linux and gpl and whatnot.... I think HTC should have the right to keep the portion of code they worked on closed source. Show what they modified but not how exactly they modified it.
Just because you change or add code to an software base that's open and free doesn't mean your work gets donated to the world. I belive you should willingly open your code, but not be legally forced into doing so.
There are plenty of companies out there that release what they use in a very similar fasion, roku and apple to name a few. They don't release the source of the portion they modified but they tell you what they modified.... and post the source of what was modified, *before* the made the changes.
http://www.roku.com/support/gpl_rdvp
http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/iphone-312/
unless you're a lawyer.... making claims or demanding something from a big company like this... I belive alot of people will be kind to know that you're probally just talking out your butt. No offence to anyone that stands behind open source.... but I hear alot of backyard courtroom talk like this in my field of work and I just smile and nod the entire time, and take heed no to take anything they say too seriously.
If you make a claim, expecially when it comes to legal stuff, make sure you bring it with the quotes references & citations of where exactly someone is breaking the law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With more commercial OSS licenses such as BSD and Apache. But GPL is a viral license of sorts. If you add to the kernel your derivative work automatically becomes GPL, its designed this way for this very reason.
I'm just speaking about the Kernel.
Basically what you need to ask for is the modifications done to the Kernel that falls under GPL. You are NOT interested in the OS as a whole but just want the kernel source for the CDMA Hero as the GPL dictates.
More info here.
johnsongrantr said:
Just because you change or add code to an software base that's open and free doesn't mean your work gets donated to the world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly what it means, actually. Go read the GPL.
And after some research I'm doing the reference you did not provide, "Go read" isn't really a solid argument. But you are all correct it appears.
"the underlying Linux kernel is licensed under version 2 of the Free Software Foundation's General Public License (GPLv2)"
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/...se-the-apache-software-license-over-gplv2.ars
"The GPL is an example of a powerful copyleft license that requires derived works to be available under the same copyleft. Under this philosophy, the GPL grants the recipients of a computer program the rights of the free software definition and uses copyleft to ensure the freedoms are preserved, even when the work is changed or added to"
"GPLv1 said that any vendor distributing binaries must also make the human readable source code available under the same licensing terms"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License
"the biggest change in version 2 was to introduce a "Liberty or Death" clause - the clause that says if somebody uses a patent or something else to effectively make a program non-free then it cannot be distributed at all"
http://fsfe.org/projects/gplv3/fisl-rms-transcript.en.html#liberty-or-death
ok so I wrote HTC and this is what I said, I would like some feedback before I send it, let me know what I should change:
Let me start off by stating that I love the new Hero that I have, You all have done a great job in producing this phone.
Now let me get to the point of this email. HTC chose to make and develop an android phone, when doing this HTC has accepted to the current licensing laws. Now I know that you (HTC) will probably respond that your version of android is licensed under Apache2. Whether or not it is, does not make a difference, as I am not asking for HTC's source of their distribution of android, I am only asking for the kernel source, which falls under the GPL licensing no matter which way you look at it. Let me give you source to look at.
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING:
Now in section 2B of the GNU Licensing Terms and Agreements it states:
"You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
parties under the terms of this License."
Section 3B states when distributing the kernel (which you did when you sold the cellphones) you must:
"Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code"
Now whether or not HTC wants to distribute the kernel source, does not matter; By law you are required to release your KERNEL source. So we (the owners of the CDMA SPRINT HERO) will give HTC ten days before we make this issue publicly known, which could lead to.... Well we all know what it could lead to.
Thank you for your time,
We hope you will make the right decision,
Samuel R. Barthelemy
One of the thousand CDMA HERO OWNERS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wasupwithuman said:
ok so I wrote HTC and this is what I said, I would like some feedback before I send it, let me know what I should change:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is good man. It is does the whole good cop bad cop thing by being nice yet firm and you let them know within ten days we would do something. Here is the thing though. We need to make sure we do something after ten days if they don't do anything. Can anybody actually make something happen in ten days? Because if we tell them that and nobody does anything and we dont do anything then they will just see these emails as idle threats that simply clog their inbox.
Since HTC has not yet provided the source code for the updated kernel (2.6.29-bc0d2cff) that ships with the 2.1 update, I'm putting up this thread to document my requests that they provide it. Once again, they're giving me the run-around.
Request 10USCW22ENA001190
Per the terms of the HTC Legal Agreement on my HTC CDMA (Sprint) Hero, Section 4 (End User License Agreement), I am formally requesting the source code for the Linux kernel 2.6.29 as installed on my phone. I have installed the recent Android 2.1 upgrade, and it does not appear that HTC has published the required source code yet.
As the Linux kernel is licensed under the General Public License (GPL), anyone distributing this software must also provide the source code used to compile the software. Any delay in doing so is a violation of copyright.
The specific version of the software being distributed in the HTC Hero (Sprint) Android 2.1 update is as follows:
Kernel version:
2.6.29-bc0d2cff
[email protected] #1
Thank you for taking the time to post this source code, and making sure that HTC is fulfilling its open-source (and copyright law) obligations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First reply from Philip (North America Support (Tech))
Hello Chris, Thank you for taking the time to write us. I understand that you need the source code for the 2.1 version of the Sprint Hero. Rather than getting into a semantics debate of the device being under the Apache License or the GPL, I will just state the facts as they are. The department that you are in contact with is HTC Technical Support; we do not have any part of posting the source code, nor do we have information as to when it will be posted. However, when the source code is available you will be able to find it at developer.htc.com. Thank you for your patience in this matter. If you have any other questions, feel free to contact us again. You can find additional support at support forums at community.htc.com. There is also a customer satisfaction survey for you to take if you are interested. Philip HTC Technical Support www.htc.com www.twitter.com/htc
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...and my response:
There is NO issue of "semantics" regarding the licensing and source code request I made. The Android platform is licensed under the Apache Software License, while the Linux kernel that the phone runs on is licensed under the General Public License (GPL). I made a very specific request for the Linux kernel source code, which is unarguably licensed via the GPL.
This is very clearly documented in HTC's Legal Documents bundled with the phone. Also clearly documented is the fact that this is the department I am to contact in order to be provided with the source code. Please read the Legal Documents bundled with the HTC Hero (Sprint), consult with a Supervisor, and let me know whether or not HTC will be complying with their End-User License Agreement. If the terms of the End-User License Agreement differ from what is provided with the phone, I would like a copy of the new document.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For what its worth, the Legal Documents I am referring to can be accessed by visiting "Menu"->"Settings"->"About phone"->"Legal information"->"HTC legal"->"4. End user License Agreement"
Nice dude!
Way to push them using their own EULA.
I look forward to seeing how this unfolds
Legal department would probably respond better to pressure.
18. Notices. HTC may give you all notices (including legal process) that HTC is required to give by any lawful method, including by posting notice on the Site or by sending it to any email or mailing address that you provide to HTC. You agree to keep your email and mailing addresses current and to check for notices posted on the Site. You agree to send HTC notice by mailing it to HTC’s “Address for Legal Notices” which is:
HTC Corporation
No. 23 Xing-Hua Rd.
330 Taoyuan City
Taiwan, R.O.C.
Attn: Legal Department
With a copy to:
HTC America, Inc.
13920 SE Eastgate Way, Suite 400
Bellevue, WA 98005
Attn: Legal Department
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My original response to this thread was going to be "not another thread like this...", but then I read your replies to them. I like how you're handling it so far and how you're using their own rules against them
Welcome to round 2 everybody! Hope it doesn't take as long as it did last time. How bout we send them a transcript of the last kernel request thread.
I am glad to see this going again. Like Mrbiggz said, maybe it wont take as long this time.
They released the Eris source like a week after 2.1 was pushed out to their phones.
Wonder why the delay.
-------------------------------------
Sent from my Android phone.
Prolly cause they are pissed about last time. We were relentless and now they want to make us pay for it. LOLOL
cmccracken said:
For what its worth, the Legal Documents I am referring to can be accessed by visiting "Menu"->"Settings"->"About phone"->"Legal information"->"HTC legal"->"4. End user License Agreement"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After a quick look there, you may also want to send your request to "customer service" as that's where they state to contact in my phone. I'm running a 2.1 rom (Fresh) and don't know if that info varies any or not. At any rate, a good support person would have "not gotten into the semantics of it" and given you this information, or looked into it further and let you know that. I'm not sure if contacting CS would get you any further or not...
FAIL on the part of this HTC support person...
jporter12 said:
After a quick look there, you may also want to send your request to "customer service" as that's where they state to contact in my phone. I'm running a 2.1 rom (Fresh) and don't know if that info varies any or not. At any rate, a good support person would have "not gotten into the semantics of it" and given you this information, or looked into it further and let you know that. I'm not sure if contacting CS would get you any further or not...
FAIL on the part of this HTC support person...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did go to "Customer Service". Their "E-mail Support" option is the same place as the Tech Support system. Apparently the rep doesn't know what his job is.
I love this. Their own legal team is leading to their downfall.
fortune82 said:
I love this. Their own legal team is leading to their downfall.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't take full credit for this approach. The last go-around, I repeatedly had a member of the Google Android team suggest that I "read the legal docs" on the phone. I think I finally caught what he was saying between the lines.
In reality the haven't released the code to us because there is a giant sectionof comment in the kernel source that says. and I qoute - "... this line of code is horribly written and would allow for a buffer over run kernel exploit for elivated privledges (i.e. ROOT/TOOR) if a hacker happens to notice the null pointer called *thisIsNotAnExploitLoopHole ..." It then goes on to show the code that can be used to exploit it, but that got lengthy.
@OP, very well put. Let's hope for a 2.1 Kernal release very soon.
Well looks like its going to be another battle with them to get this out, I'm in again and will post the responses that I revive.
-------------------------------------
Sent via the XDA Tapatalk App
We need to start a pool and see how long it takes. I bet at least a month based on the fact that sprint some how will slow down the process.
cmccracken said:
I did go to "Customer Service". Their "E-mail Support" option is the same place as the Tech Support system. Apparently the rep doesn't know what his job is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, gotcha. Something I did not know about that made me look like a total newb... Oh wait, I AM newbsauce!
I'm with Kcarpenter in that they wouldn't want to let it out now to give the devs here access to an exploit that woudl give us root!
ricersniper said:
We need to start a pool and see how long it takes. I bet at least a month based on the fact that sprint some how will slow down the process.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see it happening until after it's rooted.
We have been consistently working the kernel source issue since the Gtab came out, and it looks like it is starting to get through to Viewsonic. Let's make it clear how bad we want it.
I think we should take tomorrow, Saturday 12/18, to get every single person that sees this post to call Viewsonic's Gtablet support line. Additionally if you have a twitter account, every person needs to request kernel source from @ViewSonic.
Coordinate on IRC: irc.freenode.net, #tegratab
Phone: (866) 501-6405
Twitter: @ViewSonic (tag with #gpl or #vs-gpl)
Email: [email protected] (tapntap)
Between now and tomorrow, let's come up with a standard message so we can get our point across in a consistent manor.
Example:
Twitter: @ViewSonic Abide by the GPL, Release the Gtablet kernel source
Phone: We request that Viewsonic releases the kernel source for the Gtablet. The kernel source has been modified by Viewsonic to support the device hardware, and therfore is required to be released by the GPL.
FAQ:
Why do we need kernel source?
Significant low level tweaking occurs at the kernel level, additionally any new release(2.3) uses a specific kernel. If we don't have source we have to wait until VS provides us a kernel. This vastly impacts how soon we can run the newest android releases, which is compounded by the fact that VS incorporated a custom interface into the Gtablet.
Why can't we compile one today?
The hardware drivers are statically linked in the kernel, which means they are included in the kernel binary. This makes it impossible for us to extract the drivers that we need for the touchscreen, accelerometer, etc to compile a kernel. If they were dynamically linked, we would have access to the driver binaries. If we have the full source we would have access to the driver source.
rothnic said:
We have been consistently working the kernel source issue since the Gtab came out, and it looks like it is starting to get through to Viewsonic. Let's make it clear how bad we want it.
I think we should take tomorrow, Saturday 12/18, to get every single person that sees this post to call Viewsonic's Gtablet support line. Additionally if you have a twitter account, every person needs to request kernel source from @ViewSonic.
Phone: (866) 501-6405
Twitter: @ViewSonic
Email: [email protected] (tapntap)
Between now and tomorrow, let's come up with a standard message so we can get our point across in a consistent manor.
Example:
Twitter: @ViewSonic Abide by the GPL, Release the Gtablet kernel source
Phone: We request that Viewsonic releases the kernel source for the Gtablet. The kernel source has been modified by Viewsonic to support the device hardware, and therfore is required to be released by the GPL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm in. I think we should all try to call at the same time as well. Make every person on the phone take a call about kernel/system source. I'll twitter/email while I wait on hold.
Ill make sure to send a twitter message
I'm in. Also, if you guys are on other websites that have a G-Tablet forum, you should start a thread mirroring this one.
I'm not sure I like the twitter message. How about saying "please" with that? (You "catch more flies with honey than you do vinegar"....)
With the call-in message, I'd suggest something along the lines of "Since the gtab has hardware that does not have any released drivers, please release the kernel source for the currently running ROM image."
Well the time to tweet is now they have some twitter thing going on where you tweet a tv show you watch and add #VSTV at the end, so we should request kernel and add #VSTV at the end
it looks like Tap N tap is not part of viewsonic.
Tap 'n Tap is a technology + design firm located in Boston. For more information, please contact us at [email protected] .
It looks like Viewsonic either outsourced the development to this firm or just licensed it..
can viewsonic license the ROM from Advent Vega or Roebeet?
Will call & send message!
I am in. Will call.
Go Devs..
Well already asked about kernek source once on twitter. but cant hurt to keep asking lol
Sent from my VEGAn-TAB-v1.0.0b3 using Tapatalk
please!
elitepsycho said:
Well already asked about kernek source once on twitter. but cant hurt to keep asking lol
Sent from my VEGAn-TAB-v1.0.0b3 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah the key here is "onslaught" compared to our single requests here or there. We want it to be undeniable that a huge portion of people want this.
Also, I posted the responses as an example. I'd expect everyone to tailor theirs, but the key point I was making was to request KERNEL source, not just source.
tyy10002 said:
it looks like Tap N tap is not part of viewsonic.
Tap 'n Tap is a technology + design firm located in Boston. For more information, please contact us at [email protected] .
It looks like Viewsonic either outsourced the development to this firm or just licensed it..
can viewsonic license the ROM from Advent Vega or Roebeet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct. Viewsonic has sourced out their development to Asia. Additionally they have some type of contract with TapNTap to compile, probably bug test, and distribute the updates.
The reason I included the TapNTap email is that they are the source that is distributing the update(with kernel). The kernel they distribute has statically linked drivers(not modules) that we cannot extract. Therefore they are in violation of the GPL by doing that.
I'm certainly in. I want to do SOMETHING to help this amazing community. I'm going to do all 3 forms of communication. Is it too much to make a website advertising the fact that they're not releasing source per the GPL?
Sent from my VEGAn-TAB-v1.0.0b3 using Tapatalk
I think you are better off sending a letter to James Chu and/or Jeff Volpe. And I think you will find more or less legal threat GPL letters on the web you can use as a model for you communication....
http://www.viewsonic.com/company/executive/
Technical support can do little in this matter.
This thread needs a bump this morning (Eastern Time).
Send a letter too vsc - but a polite, nice one, not a legal threat letter. Unless you happen to be a Linux kernel contributor who can legitimately claim that your copyrighted code that's being distributed here, in which case feel free to say what you will.
And Viewsonic and Tap N Tap have both acknowledged that they need to release the kernel source code. So they are aware of the obligation. Our goal here should just be to politely nag enough that feel pressure.
Doing my part to get the issue in front of them by pestering on twitter....well not really pestering today and day before yesterday. Seems persistence pays off a guy a few days ago asked twice about the kernel and got a response. Seems not many people are flooding twitter i never use it until latly to keep up with news from viewsonic. Hope people are calling viewsonic then
My inquiry has been sent. Come on everyone! If we are unable to organize this then we have little credibility with VS and TNT!
I did my part on Twitter. As did two, ahem, close friends on other Twitter accounts.
Called and tweeted. Email next.
Hi folks,
I am interested in developing for the Binatone iDect iHome, a very little know home phone with Android on it.
I emailed Binatone asking for the source code but the response I got was:
'The Android operating system is developed by Google. You would need to contact them with any questions about they system.'
Where do I stand, what can I say to them to make them comply with the GPL? What happens if they refuse to release it, is there a section of UK law that can be applied?
Please, if anyone could give me any pointers I would really appreciate it!
Does anyone have any ideas on what to do when a company does not adhere to the GPL?
vinokirk said:
Hi folks,
I am interested in developing for the Binatone iDect iHome, a very little know home phone with Android on it.
I emailed Binatone asking for the source code but the response I got was:
'The Android operating system is developed by Google. You would need to contact them with any questions about they system.'
Where do I stand, what can I say to them to make them comply with the GPL? What happens if they refuse to release it, is there a section of UK law that can be applied?
Please, if anyone could give me any pointers I would really appreciate it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The OS itself is open source, that does not mean the kernel has to be open source, nor do they really have to provide you any support. I think they were perhaps thinking that you wanted the OS source?
I'm not too sure of the specifics. All I know is that if a company uses Android on their device they have to release the source code for it.
When I had my Dell Streak, there was a big 'fight' with Dell as they hadn't released the source code. But they eventually released it, and now its available here:
http://opensource.dell.com/releases/streak/
So what source code does a company have to release to comply with the GPL?
Anyone have any ideas what to do here?
I was under the impression that Android is published under the GPL.
The likes of Samsung and Dell etc all publish their source code.
We need to bomb HTC's website with comments to encourage them to release the kernel source code for our device. I suggest we all go to the following link daily and request its release;
http://htcdev.com/contact
HTC just sent me a link to take a survey, another good tool to blast them with.
http://survey.htc.com/worldwide
Code has been released, I like to think all our complaints helped. Feel free to lock this thread if need be!
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
We have been. I've sent them several notices on a near daily basis.
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using xda premium
I doubt that that link is anything more than a placebo.
http://www.htc.com/us/about/contact-by-email
Say something along the lines of "you're in violation of GPLv2 which requires that source be released along with binary. GPLv2 does not allow for anything besides release of source NOT being ANY LATER than binary distribution."
I.e., though GPLv2 doesn't specify an exact time frame, the implication of this is that the source must be made available by the EXACT MOMENT that the binary is distributed. It *does* allow for the source to be released BEFORE the binary, but does NOT allow for the binary to be released before the source.
IMO, the kernel source archive should be included within the system partition of the phone, at least for early releases while there is sufficient storage space for it all to fit. This would greatly simply source distribution.
Even though I went to that page and asked for the kernel source code to be released, it looks like they're on a pretty routine schedule as far as what and when they release things and we're probably still a little ways out on the source code. But it can't HURT to keep trying, right?
Submitted. Hopefully they'll listen up.
BiggJurk said:
We need to bomb HTC's website with comments to encourage them to release the kernel source code for our device. I suggest we all go to the following link daily and request its release;
http://htcdev.com/contact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, we have been. As unclespoon said they are on a fairly set release schedule that they must be comfortable with [legal-wise].
Read my replies here, there is another link that got me a response that was from a human:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1247374
HTC does this **** on purpose. They have a bunch of new devices coming out and if they were to release the code that would impact there profit margins. This processor can handle 1.5 ghz as a daily driver. The new HTC amaze has exact same processor but is overclocked 300mhz more then our device. And it has a 1gb of RAM. Samsung has gotten great at releasing there code within 1 week or even earlier. HTC PLEASE TAKE NOTES FROM SAMSUNG.
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using xda premium
FYI
I filled out a customer service survey from HTC and gave them all bad ratings in regards to their non-response for the kernel source code. A representative just personally called me and is trying to get an eta on the release if not email me a copy of the code. I would suggest everyone completes a survey with negative comments at the following location:http://survey.htc.com/worldwide. I know surveys like this affects their metrics and gets managements attention. The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Regards,
Filled out the survey.
Let's see if they respond.
cal3thousand said:
Filled out the survey.
Let's see if they respond.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it took them 2 weeks to get back to me.
BiggJurk said:
I think it took them 2 weeks to get back to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess is that they'll "get back to you" in a month or however long until they would have normally released the source code. I think they're too big to be bothered by people complaining about lack of source code. Bottom line is there probably won't ever be any "consequences" as a result of them taking their time on releasing kernel source. We only complain because we want it, but it's not like they are really doing anything wrong by just releasing it on their own schedule.
BiggJurk said:
The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard that before, but I don't see how that's possible since Android is based on Linux. If it were based on BSD that'd be another matter.
BiggJurk said:
The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, congrats to phone guy!! Unfortunately, either he was trying to get you to shut-up or misunderstood what you wanted them to release. Google mostly licensed Android with the Apache 2.0. This allows others to customize Android and they don't have to release their changes i.e. customizations made by phone manufacturers (it means other things too but this was Google's main reason for this license). HTC doesn't have to give us their Android source. The Linux kernel is GPL - there is no way around that. The GPL states that the source must be released at the same time as the binary is released to the end-user (it even states that the source should be no harder to obtain than the binary is i.e. we should get the kernel source with our devices - on the sd card or something). Still have no idea where HTC gets 90-120 days from the GPL wording.
I sent a note to EFF asking if they were aware of whats going on. They said they were and were researching the situation.
---------- Post added at 06:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------
unclespoon said:
but it's not like they are really doing anything wrong by just releasing it on their own schedule.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are though. They are directly violating the GNU GPL but you are right - there are too few of us who actually want the kernel source for them to really worry. Can't believe one of the actual Linux kernel devs hasn't caught wind of this and made a statement.
I sent a couple of requests. Let's hope they move their asses.
Source has been released:
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
HebrewToYou said:
Source has been released:
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you were the first one to find it. I thanked you elsewhere you've mentioned it as well.
Maybe the OP can come through and update the thread title.
Edit to add - download reads 94.0MB on the HTC page, but my download over Tmo 4g is saying out of 89.6MB and my home pc is saying 89.7MB...so we'll see what's up when I get it.
YES!!! Time to OC this bad boy..
Please get on it Devs..!!!
RazoE said:
YES!!! Time to OC this bad boy..
Please get on it Devs..!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All ready on it
Sent from my Senseless Doubleshot using xda premium
That's funny.
I just received the HTC reply to my request. I'm going to play like my request was the straw for that camel's back... Your Welcome Everybody!!!
j/k. This is wonderful news though. I'm stoked
Thread locked by OP request