The FSF raises the stakes for Cisco [LWN.net]

The FSF raises the stakes for Cisco

Posted Dec 14, 2008 15:09 UTC (Sun) by johill (subscriber, #25196)
Parent article: The FSF raises the stakes for Cisco

One thing I've been missing in the whole discussion that is, I think, relevant to a number of claims and counterclaims is whether or not Cisco has accompanied the products with a written offer to the source code or not. If they have, then it's uncertain how long they may take to provide said sources, and it may well be that the FSF is required to do as they have been done.

On the other hand, and this hasn't been mentioned either, which too I've been missing: if they have distributed just a single product without said written offer in the past, then, as far as I understand, they have automatically lost all their rights under the GPL, and are thus always in violation of copyright if they use the source in a future product, until those rights have been reinstated by the copyright holder.

This seems relevant to the case, since all those demands the FSF is making imply that without Cisco meeting those demands they will not reinstate Cisco's rights to the source code, which must surely be their leverage?

to post comments

The FSF raises the stakes for Cisco

Posted Dec 14, 2008 18:06 UTC (Sun) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (1 responses)

I think the GPLv2 is pretty clear:

"Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years,to give any third party, [the source, etc.]."

How can the length of time be misinterpreted, in any reasonable way?

The FSF raises the stakes for Cisco

Posted Dec 14, 2008 19:23 UTC (Sun) by johill (subscriber, #25196) [Link]

Sorry, I was referring to the time between receiving the request and sending out the source.