Your outrageous wiki edits.

117 views
Skip to first unread message

Luc Verhaegen

unread,
Jul 8, 2015, 5:36:49 PM7/8/15
to ke...@allwinnertech.com, linux...@googlegroups.com
Hi Kevin,

I just noticed your edits to our GPL violations page.

It seems that you and Allwinnwer still have not fully comprehended just
how you went wrong and what can be done to fix it.

The most remarkable changes (which i have undone) were:

a) that since you aren't really using some parts of the code (dram
scaling) anymore these days, Allwinner isn't really violating the gpl
all that much anymore and then the fact that it once violated the GPL
can be totally brushed under the carpet.
b) the fact that allwinner was not the original violator on some
touchscreen drivers, the fact that it was not allwinner that produced
those binaries, makes it all totally ok that allwinner shipped those
binaries, which in turn makes allwinner definitely not a repeat violator
of the gpl, and this bit of history should totally be brushed under the
carpet as well.

WTF?

Have you not learned anything, or are you actively playing with us? How
many months now have you and the rest of your company had to get up to
speed on this topic? What is it that is so difficult here, or why are
you trying to play these games still?

Also, with changes like this, it would not be wrong for me or others to
block your wiki account. Be very careful what future steps you take.

In a case like this, it is also seriously not done to execute such
controversial edits yourself. You ask someone from the opposite side
(like me) or someone totally independent (as in, not one of your
pathetic strawmen) to review the current status and validity of the
content of such a controversial wiki page.

It seems that you and Allwinner haven't learned anything there either.

Are the things that i beat into you and allwinner really the only things
that stick?

Luc Verhaegen.

jons...@gmail.com

unread,
Jul 8, 2015, 8:27:34 PM7/8/15
to Luc Verhaegen, Meng Zhang, linux-sunxi
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Luc Verhaegen <li...@skynet.be> wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> I just noticed your edits to our GPL violations page.
>
> It seems that you and Allwinnwer still have not fully comprehended just
> how you went wrong and what can be done to fix it.
>
> The most remarkable changes (which i have undone) were:
>
> a) that since you aren't really using some parts of the code (dram
> scaling) anymore these days, Allwinner isn't really violating the gpl
> all that much anymore and then the fact that it once violated the GPL
> can be totally brushed under the carpet.

Allwinner needs to clarify if they own the code in question. If they
don't own it, it should be sufficient to state that they have tried
and failed to secure a source release. Since getting the source was
not possible, rewriting it and releasing it under the GPL should be
ok.

If you really want to pursue this, then Allwinner can identify the
company that won't release the original code and someone can spend the
money to take them to court.

It is also possible that Allwinner has simply lost the original
source. Their version control practices are not very good. I'm still
waiting for them to start keeping everything on public git servers.

> b) the fact that allwinner was not the original violator on some
> touchscreen drivers, the fact that it was not allwinner that produced
> those binaries, makes it all totally ok that allwinner shipped those
> binaries, which in turn makes allwinner definitely not a repeat violator
> of the gpl, and this bit of history should totally be brushed under the
> carpet as well.

I don't think b) is a GPL violation by Allwinner. Since Allwinner does
not possess the source code to these binaries they are unable to
determine if they are a derived work or not. This is NVidia's defense
in shipping binaries. NVidia claims the binaries are not derived works
of the kernel (that they are developed on Windows and then ported with
a wrapper layer). Reshipping a non-derived binary is not a GPL
violation.

That doesn't imply that we have to like this. And I also don't believe
that the touchscreen driver is a non-derived work. But that is not
Allwinner's problem, it is the developer of the touchscreen driver's
problem.

Allwinner should exercise its rights under the GPL and request source
from the vendor of the touchscreen driver and see what they claim. If
they refuse to deliver source maybe Allwinner might want to file a
court action to compel its release. But the GPL does not require you
to take action. Allwinner should also consider not doing business in
the future with vendors that won't supply source.

This is parallel to the Mali problem. Mali is clearly in violation of
the GPL and there is nothing Allwinner can do except make a GPL
request that source code be delivered. The violator is ARM, Inc.

>
> WTF?
>
> Have you not learned anything, or are you actively playing with us? How
> many months now have you and the rest of your company had to get up to
> speed on this topic? What is it that is so difficult here, or why are
> you trying to play these games still?
>
> Also, with changes like this, it would not be wrong for me or others to
> block your wiki account. Be very careful what future steps you take.
>
> In a case like this, it is also seriously not done to execute such
> controversial edits yourself. You ask someone from the opposite side
> (like me) or someone totally independent (as in, not one of your
> pathetic strawmen) to review the current status and validity of the
> content of such a controversial wiki page.
>
> It seems that you and Allwinner haven't learned anything there either.
>
> Are the things that i beat into you and allwinner really the only things
> that stick?
>
> Luc Verhaegen.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Jon Smirl
jons...@gmail.com

Luc Verhaegen

unread,
Jul 9, 2015, 3:02:44 AM7/9/15
to jons...@gmail.com, linux-sunxi
On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 08:27:31PM -0400, jons...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I don't think b) is a GPL violation by Allwinner. Since Allwinner does
> not possess the source code to these binaries they are unable to
> determine if they are a derived work or not. This is NVidia's defense
> in shipping binaries. NVidia claims the binaries are not derived works
> of the kernel (that they are developed on Windows and then ported with
> a wrapper layer). Reshipping a non-derived binary is not a GPL
> violation.
>
> That doesn't imply that we have to like this. And I also don't believe
> that the touchscreen driver is a non-derived work. But that is not
> Allwinner's problem, it is the developer of the touchscreen driver's
> problem.
>
> Allwinner should exercise its rights under the GPL and request source
> from the vendor of the touchscreen driver and see what they claim. If
> they refuse to deliver source maybe Allwinner might want to file a
> court action to compel its release. But the GPL does not require you
> to take action. Allwinner should also consider not doing business in
> the future with vendors that won't supply source.

Allwinner shipped the code.

> This is parallel to the Mali problem. Mali is clearly in violation of
> the GPL and there is nothing Allwinner can do except make a GPL
> request that source code be delivered. The violator is ARM, Inc.

Mali is not in violation of the GPL. Kernel source is provided openly
by ARM.

Luc Verhaegen.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages