Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 66 posts

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#11

Post by warp »

noisy_boy wrote: post #2

Genuine question: what happens if they refuse to release? How is it enforced? If the answer is going to court, who sues them? EFF?

I think the Software Freedom Conservancy is probably the most active in trying to enforce GPL compliance on free software in general, and for the Linux kernel in particular.

Some kernel developers have assigned their copyrights directly to the SFC, and some have signed agreements for SFC to do this enforcement on their behalf. (see https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/ )

Obviously there are many people and organizations who own copyright to parts of the linux kernel, and any of those can attempt to enforce the GPL on the kernel in court.

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#12

Post by my123 »

oneplane wrote: post #7

sm8250 sounds like a Snapdragon thing from Qualcomm. In other words: unlikely to happen because of NDAs. Even if one plus wanted to it wouldn't be up to them. Edit: It seems there are a lot of FOSS warriors in here, let me clarify: historically, Qualcomm has been legally hostile with both FOSS software communities as well as with their own customers. They will not give anything for free, and if they can slap a ton of…

Btw, Qualcomm and MediaTek do _not_ block kernel source releases by OEMs in any way.

You will still want to get the source tree from the OEM even for new devices though.

While the GKI means that kernels are the same across recent devices, kernel modules and device tree sources for the specific device aren't part of that.

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#13

Post by DiabloD3 »

This happens every new Android version with OnePlus.

OnePlus releases them usually a few months behind the end of initially release cycle getting all the older phones onto the newer build. Covid has been making this worse, plus people left the team when Oppo and OnePlus merged teams.

Kinda wish they would just stop doing it, but this is why phones maybe shouldn't ship with a working OS anyways and make the user supply it instead.

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#14

Post by oneplane »

car_analogy wrote: post #8
oneplane wrote: post #7

sm8250 sounds like a Snapdragon thing from Qualcomm. In other words: unlikely to happen because of NDAs. Even if one plus wanted to it wouldn't be up to them. Edit: It seems there are a lot of FOSS warriors in here, let me clarify: historically, Qualcomm has been legally hostile with both FOSS software communities as well as with their own customers. They will not give anything for free, and if they can slap a ton of…

An NDA does not override the GPL, and does not shield from its obligations. As you say, it's "not up to them" to decide which legal obligations they will honor.

I didn't write anything about overriding, did I? I presented a problem scenario where one plus is screwed because they are in between conflicting legal settings.

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#15

Post by oneplane »

BaseballPhysics wrote: post #10
oneplane wrote: post #7

sm8250 sounds like a Snapdragon thing from Qualcomm. In other words: unlikely to happen because of NDAs. Even if one plus wanted to it wouldn't be up to them. Edit: It seems there are a lot of FOSS warriors in here, let me clarify: historically, Qualcomm has been legally hostile with both FOSS software communities as well as with their own customers. They will not give anything for free, and if they can slap a ton of…

Then they can remove that code from their kernel tree and repackage and redistribute it as a separate binary module.

Well, go tell them I guess? Thanks for your reply anyway.

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#16

Post by oneplane »

my123 wrote: post #12
oneplane wrote: post #7

sm8250 sounds like a Snapdragon thing from Qualcomm. In other words: unlikely to happen because of NDAs. Even if one plus wanted to it wouldn't be up to them. Edit: It seems there are a lot of FOSS warriors in here, let me clarify: historically, Qualcomm has been legally hostile with both FOSS software communities as well as with their own customers. They will not give anything for free, and if they can slap a ton of…

Btw, Qualcomm and MediaTek do _not_ block kernel source releases by OEMs in any way. You will still want to get the source tree from the OEM even for new devices though. While the GKI means that kernels are the same across recent devices, kernel modules and device tree sources for the specific device aren't part of that.

They don't block source releases indeed, but only for unencumbered sources. What the ODM should probably have done is either make it out-of-tree or make an unencumbered implementation (if that is the problem at all) and ship that. Or maybe they just made a mistake or were lazy and will include it after the weekend when people are actually back at work.

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#17

Post by car_analogy »

oneplane wrote: post #14
car_analogy wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An NDA does not override the GPL, and does not shield from its obligations. As you say, it's "not up to them" to decide which legal obligations they will honor.

I didn't write anything about overriding, did I? I presented a problem scenario where one plus is screwed because they are in between conflicting legal settings.

> I didn't write anything about overriding, did I?

> In other words: unlikely to happen because of NDAs

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#18

Post by rafram »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #13

This happens every new Android version with OnePlus. OnePlus releases them usually a few months behind the end of initially release cycle getting all the older phones onto the newer build. Covid has been making this worse, plus people left the team when Oppo and OnePlus merged teams. Kinda wish they would just stop doing it, but this is why phones maybe shouldn't ship with a working OS anyways and make the user suppl…

> this is why phones maybe shouldn't ship with a working OS anyways and make the user supply it instead.

I really hope you’re joking. In what way would that be better for anyone but the most hardcore tinkerers?

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#19

Post by pabs3 »

warp wrote: post #11
noisy_boy wrote: post #2

Genuine question: what happens if they refuse to release? How is it enforced? If the answer is going to court, who sues them? EFF?

I think the Software Freedom Conservancy is probably the most active in trying to enforce GPL compliance on free software in general, and for the Linux kernel in particular. Some kernel developers have assigned their copyrights directly to the SFC, and some have signed agreements for SFC to do this enforcement on their behalf. (see https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/ ) Obviously there are many people and o…

If Conservancy win their lawsuit against Vizio, then a precedent will be set that anyone who receives binaries based on GPL code will be able to sue for compliance, based on the third party beneficiary doctrine within contract law. This potentially depends on if the jurisdiction allows for specific performance as a remedy for contract violation.

https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vizio.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_beneficiary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance

Re: Oneplus GPL violation for Android 12 Kernel

#20

Post by snvzz »

rafram wrote: post #18
DiabloD3 wrote: post #13

This happens every new Android version with OnePlus. OnePlus releases them usually a few months behind the end of initially release cycle getting all the older phones onto the newer build. Covid has been making this worse, plus people left the team when Oppo and OnePlus merged teams. Kinda wish they would just stop doing it, but this is why phones maybe shouldn't ship with a working OS anyways and make the user suppl…

> this is why phones maybe shouldn't ship with a working OS anyways and make the user supply it instead. I really hope you’re joking. In what way would that be better for anyone but the most hardcore tinkerers?

Standardization of boot process, driver availability, ease of install.

While at it, erradication of shovelware.

Post reply on HN