Worth noting that the BMW people in the thread are in customer support, not legal.
Looking through the user's Github account, they have a history of contacting customer support representatives of companies and threatening to post the transcripts to Hacker News if their specific legal concerns are not addressed: https://gist.github.com/duncan-bayne/74d6e38c506000982237
BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
71–80 of 229 posts
Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#72What GPL licensed software are they actually infringing upon? The linked post[1] says they found mentions of systemd, but does the firmware actually contain a linux kernel? I don't see anything that looks like a kernel in the file listing. Also if the firmware is properly signed delivering it over http shouldn't matter, right? [1] https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-softw...
[deleted]
Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#73Is it a violation if they don't modify Linux itself? So if I make a device that runs Linux and my application binary, am I required to make my application code public?
Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#74Worth noting that the BMW people in the thread are in customer support, not legal.
The fact that there was no further back-and-forth makes me suspect that the guy behind the email just wants to make a spectacle :/
Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#75Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#76Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#77Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#78History has proven over and over again that this kind of public shame and blame approach doesn't help in any way, quite the opposite. Hand this over to the Free Software Conservancy or the SFLC. And that should have been the first step. Now that the bridges are burning, BMW will be far less open to civil discussion and cooperative solutions. Well done. #sarcasm
History has proven over and over again that naming and shaming works miracles. Companies that turned a blind eye and were completely unreachable suddenly turned active and kind just to save their reputation. Going to or even just threatening to go to the media, I know from experience, is indeed productive. I am really curious where you got the idea that it's counter productive. Asking the conservancy to clean up this…
The example that pops into my head is the time when some kid start working on a mod to the Quake 3D engine that was possibly in violation of a free software license. Instead of just reporting it to the copyright holder (id Software), they engaged in a campaign of harassment until John Carmack himself came out and told them to stop. It was some seriously shameful shit.
Public shaming should be one of the last steps to take. Maybe before starting a lawsuit, or maybe after, that's up for debate, but certainly after other avenues have been exhausted.
Re: BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking through the user's Github account, they have a history of contacting customer support representatives of companies and threatening to post the transcripts to Hacker News if their specific legal concerns are not addressed: https://gist.github.com/duncan-bayne/74d6e38c506000982237
How else can one get in touch with a megacorp?