Comment by f1shy
1 month ago
> because it's very likely there are no changes to the kernel
That is a gratuitous assumption. My experience is, as long as there is the smallest custom hardware, you will have to make some tweaks here and there.
> they're not asking for anything of value or using the GPL to advance software freedom by freeing up some valuable code, they're just wasting both theirs and others' time asking for something they can already download directly.
I'm sorry that the company which is making lots of money by using a copyrighted SW has to "waste" 200 dollars in some bureaucracy, printing and postage. But is the license of the SW they are using, and should abide by it.
> That is a gratuitous assumption. My experience is, as long as there is the smallest custom hardware, you will have to make some tweaks here and there.
How sure are you small tweaks create a derivative work? In your experience.
I’m not sure of anything. And that is irrelevant. Even if it is a coma, the license holds.
No the license does not hold! Fair use exists independently of the GPL license.
Using GPL software does not take away your rights under the law. As much as the angry FSF lawyers want you to believe - I can use any GPL software in any way I choose and have the affirmative defense of fair use for every single claim they throw at me.
Whether I lose or not depends on specific factors of my use - and I'm sorry but one comma isn't going to cut it.
Edit: A single comma will lose 100% of the time to a summary judgement via de minimis. That's just an incredible legal theory you have there and not something you should be spreading.
Edit2: The Beastie Boys famously won via de minimis at summary judgement for a 3 note sample. It matters not whether those 3 notes were GPL notes or not. It matters what the law is.