Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 9, 2026 4:57 UTC (Fri) by IanKelling (subscriber, #89418)
In reply to: Why doesn't VIZIO just comply? by marcH
Parent article: SFC v. VIZIO: who can enforce the GPL?

Hanlon's razor: they don't have the sources and don't know how much effort it would take to find them, if they can be found at all.

to post comments

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 9, 2026 5:59 UTC (Fri) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link] (4 responses)

This sounds likely. I have worked at many companies where resurrecting sources from even a year earlier would have been impossible. It might have been possible to get close by trial and error, but when you consider that the compiler and ancillary sources and libraries may also have changed, it sounds like the kind of nightmare requests I dreaded, partly for having to explain to managerial nitwits what all the problems were.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 9, 2026 22:38 UTC (Fri) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link]

>companies where resurrecting sources from even a year earlier would have been impossible

Section 3b says: """a written offer, valid for at least three years""". If unable or unwilling to be bothered to keep records for 3 years, the way out for the seller is sec. 3a: """Accompany it with the complete [...] code""". Doing neither is just lazy, and morally punishable.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 11, 2026 9:22 UTC (Sun) by cpitrat (subscriber, #116459) [Link] (2 responses)

No, this sounds unlikely. The article explicitly says that the SFC continued to purchase new hardware to see if the situation evolved. I think they would have been happy with a "we don't manage to provide sources for the 2022 appliance but here are the complete sources for the 2025 one".

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 14, 2026 20:12 UTC (Wed) by IanKelling (subscriber, #89418) [Link] (1 responses)

> I think they would have been happy with a "we don't manage to provide sources for the 2022 appliance but here are the complete sources for the 2025 one".

They, as in, SFC? You are mistaken.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 14, 2026 20:36 UTC (Wed) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link]

Not necessarily. Apologies, sincere mea culpas, and concrete steps to prevent further missteps go a long way towards defusing anger. Courts have been known to take that into account. And in a practical sense, accepting such steps encourages more cooperation in future cases, while being a shrill absolutist wins no favors and only encourages desperate and vindictive resistance from future transgressors.

One need only look at the difference in combat zones or current ICE ventures to see it play out in real life.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 9, 2026 10:29 UTC (Fri) by jani (subscriber, #74547) [Link]

Either that, or they have another contractual obligation with higher stakes to keep parts of the source secret. And some developers somewhere made the mistake of bundling that with GPL code to just ship it.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 14, 2026 15:42 UTC (Wed) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454) [Link] (5 responses)

They suck and they know they suck and they do not have the faintest idea on the amount of effort it would take to comply and they do not want to in the first place and they despise the SFC.

Do not underestimate the amount of company money an executive is ready to burn to avoid complying with “external” demands. These guys are used to lick the boots of the shareholders and despise everyone else. Companies make expensive mistakes all the time just because being smart conflicted with some manager’s idea of the pecking order.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 14, 2026 16:56 UTC (Wed) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (4 responses)

In the short term yes, very likely.

After many years of legal struggles reported in the media, things start being different. Shareholders read the news too, even the least competent ones.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 14, 2026 20:16 UTC (Wed) by IanKelling (subscriber, #89418) [Link] (2 responses)

> Shareholders read the news too

There are no shareholders of Vizio. LWN is doing a favor to Walmart and arguably it's readers by still referring to the historical company named Vizio, but it isn't accurate and I personally don't appreciate it. The entire article should be s/Vizio/Walmart/.

Company names

Posted Jan 14, 2026 20:22 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (1 responses)

We used the same name as appears in the court filings, including in the SFC's complaint. To have done anything else would have been confusing at best. I don't quite see how Walmart would benefit from this..?

Company names

Posted Jan 15, 2026 7:40 UTC (Thu) by IanKelling (subscriber, #89418) [Link]

> I don't quite see how Walmart would benefit from this..?

Vizio is just a brand name owned by Walmart now. There are 1000 reasons Walmart wouldn't want to be known as the one funding this lawsuit. Remember that Microsoft funded SCO lawsuits and then they put out an ad campaign about how they <3 Linux? Don't be dense.

Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

Posted Jan 15, 2026 14:28 UTC (Thu) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454) [Link]

After many years your are squarely in sunk cost fallacy land. The sunk cost being not company money (executives do not care) but the reputation of all the managers that let it degenerate into trial instead of complying with the license.