'You have to divulge your private key' meme

With that Apple/Foxconn analogy you seem to be implying that Canonical is paying equipment vendors to install and load Ubuntu at their behest. Apple pays Foxconn and Apple keeps final say and control over configuration details.

I'm not sure there is any evidence of that actually happening in the case of Canonical. If anything, it seems the other way around. OEMs pay Canonical for engineering support to integrate Ubuntu..but ultimately OEMs have final say and control over what actually ships. Though if you have any evidence of Canonical paying OEMs to get Ubuntu into devices, I'd love to see it. I've heard rumors in the past but I could never pin down a credible statement on or off the record.

Devils in the details of the contractual agreement that we will never actually be able to read. So anything with regard to how the partnership agreement deals with licensing liability or provides for indemnification or hold harmless clauses with respect to one for-profit entity or the other. The partnership agreement can say pretty much anything to try to shield one entity from liability inherent in the actions of the other. There's no point in speculating about what one entity is contractually obligated to do for the other. Whatever the concern is, it would be best for everyone if the concern was discussed between the FSF the parties who have knowledge of the agreement.

Though I will say, if Canonical entered into a contractual agreement with another entity that allowed the other entity to hold Canonical up as a liability shield..that would be a real head scratcher. I've read over the Harmony contributor agreements in full and so far it seems Canonical goes to great lengths to make sure they don't open themselves up to any implicit liability from contributors who are contributing to GPL licensed Canonical projects. I would be _shocked_ if they allowed themselves to be scapegoated by business partners looking to duck out of legal liability when it comes to GPL licensing in other contexts. So really I think this whole line of discussion is quite absurd.

-jef