[HN Gopher] Judge Signals Win for Software Freedom Conservancy i...
___________________________________________________________________
Judge Signals Win for Software Freedom Conservancy in Vizio GPL
Case
Author : speckx
Score : 80 points
Date : 2025-12-05 20:42 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (fossforce.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (fossforce.com)
| gwd wrote:
| SFC's announcement:
|
| https://sfconservancy.org/news/2025/dec/04/tentative-vizio-r...
|
| Apparently the actual case was to be argued in a session starting
| at 10am pacific, with their case as number 11.
|
| Just skimming it, it looks like the judge grants 1 of 3 requests:
|
| 1. Vizio does have a "contractual duty" to provide the source
| code to SFC of any GPLv2 or LGPLv2 software
|
| 2/3. Vizio is _not_ required to either provide the source code or
| an offer to give the source code to all buyers of the tv of any
| GPLv2 (issue 2) or LGPLv2 (issue 3).
|
| Basically, if I'm reading it correctly, they have to give you the
| source code if you ask for it, but they don't have to tell you
| that you can ask.
|
| ETA: Oh, but 2 and 3 are denied due to some technicality about
| how the SFC filed for summary judgements, without making any
| comment about whether they would have succeeded if they'd filed
| things another way.
|
| And 1 is granted because somewhere in some menu on the TV said
| they _could_ request it.
|
| So what happens if Visio removes that menu option offering to
| give you the source code, and someone else files the motions
| properly? Not clear.
|
| In other words, it doesn't look to me like it sets a real
| precedent either way.
| Zak wrote:
| > _Basically, if I 'm reading it correctly, they have to give
| you the source code if you ask for it, but they don't have to
| tell you that you can ask._
|
| I think the bigger picture is more subtle than that. You, the
| buyer do not have a cause of action if they fail to tell you
| that you can ask.
|
| They would, however be in violation of copyright if they don't
| tell buyers that they are entitled to ask for a copy of the
| source code because the license requires that they do so, and
| nothing else gives them permission to distributed the covered
| software. Any relevant copyright holder would have a cause of
| action in that case, but the SFC is not a copyright holder in
| this case.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| I dont remember if we ever told our customers that they could
| ask for our code for one of the products a former employer
| made, but I do recall one customer did eventually ask for it,
| and we obliged. I don't know much of the details as to why
| they wanted it. Just know it was a GPL licensed project. Heck
| I think we even gave them pieces that were not even GPL
| based.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| > Basically, if I'm reading it correctly, they have to give you
| the source code if you ask for it, but they don't have to tell
| you that you can ask.
|
| Sounds like GPL v4 is inbound, a GPL license that forces you to
| inform your customer that your product uses a GPL licensed
| software by putting an image of Richard Stallman somewhere in
| your startup screen.
| acuozzo wrote:
| > license that forces you to inform your customer
|
| This is what I love about the original 4-clause BSD license.
| wmf wrote:
| Putting asides the legal details, things must be pretty bad
| inside Vizio if they'd rather go to court than release the code.
| Like they can't release the code because they don't know where it
| is.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-12-05 23:00 UTC)