Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

[Posted September 10, 2010 by jake]

Kernel hacker Matthew Garrett has been looking into GPL compliance on various consumer devices, and has evidently gotten fed up with responses from the Joojoo tablet maker. In the comments on the blog posting, someone purportedly from Fusion Garage asked Garrett to contact them, so maybe it will all get resolved soon. "Fusion Garage, on the other hand, are still failing to provide source and seem entirely unconcerned about it - they've failed to respond to any of my emails since the first. Augen aren't providing source because they can't, while Fusion Garage aren't providing source because they won't. Irked by this, I've decided to try Don Marti's suggestion and file a case with US Customs. I'll admit that I have absolutely no idea how seriously these cases get taken, and so I've no great expectation of any sort of interesting outcome. But even so, if you're in the US and try to buy a Joojoo then there's a chance that it'll be seized by US customs on the way in."

to post comments

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 10, 2010 19:28 UTC (Fri) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510) [Link] (3 responses)

You should have a chat with Brad Kuhn.

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 10, 2010 20:35 UTC (Fri) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link] (2 responses)

I have, on several occasions.

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 10, 2010 22:02 UTC (Fri) by bkuhn (subscriber, #58642) [Link] (1 responses)

Indeed. I'm glad to see there are more people doing GPL enforcement in different ways. It will take many of us all doing enforcement to change the violating behaviors that have become all too common. Thanks for doing this, Matthew!

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 12, 2010 22:02 UTC (Sun) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510) [Link]

I left a message for Fusion Garage's PR person, just in case they and their lawyer decide to take this seriously and need compliance advice.

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 11, 2010 0:42 UTC (Sat) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link]

Looks like Fusion Garage noticed Matthew's blog post:

http://mjg59.livejournal.com/126865.html?thread=1744529#t...

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 13, 2010 17:22 UTC (Mon) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] (1 responses)

Joojoo/Fusion.

Aren't those the people who walked off with Arrington's design and money?

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 13, 2010 18:09 UTC (Mon) by Darkmere (subscriber, #53695) [Link]

I don't think you want to get into the blame game between those two, but yeah, it's the ex Crunchpad.

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 13, 2010 19:07 UTC (Mon) by rahvin (guest, #16953) [Link] (3 responses)

I'm curious, normally when they try to bar imports a complaint/lawsuit or whatever is filed with the ITC. This is normally in patent suits, but I thought it applied to copyrights as well. It's rather trivial to win with the ITC and a win with them Bars all imports AND the ITC can bar the sale of already imported product.

Was this an ITC complaint or was this a standard copyrighted item complaint with Customs? (I have no idea how effect an ITC ban is by comparison to a standard Customs complaint but I would think it's more effective given that it's now standard practice in patent suits to file with the ITC first).

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 13, 2010 19:13 UTC (Mon) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link] (2 responses)

A customs complaint. I'm not clear on how straightforward it is to get the ITC to enforce an unregistered copyright, and it's a somewhat more complex procedure. I've no doubt that going via the ITC would be more effective in terms of blocking shipments, but the main motivation here is simply to indicate that the violation won't be ignored and to encourage the vendor to take the matter seriously.

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 15, 2010 16:38 UTC (Wed) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] (1 responses)

There are at least three levels, in order of increasing complexity: e-allegation, e-recordation, and a Section 337 complaint. All are faster and cheaper than actual infringement cases. The e-recordation process _requires_ a copyright registration and a filing fee, and the ITC has discretion on which 337 complaints it will take action on.

Matthew Garrett files case with US Customs against Fusion Garage

Posted Sep 16, 2010 20:08 UTC (Thu) by jeffnorman (guest, #57684) [Link]

Unfortunately, Customs will only enforce either an ITC order or "Piratical" copies (see http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/legal/informed_...). In order to be "piratical" the copying must be pretty obvious. Unless JooJoo or FG have included source code (and I assume not, since that is the basis of the complaint), it would seem hard to convince Customs that these are "piratical" because you would not have access to source code that you would need to show clear copying.

Therefore I think the ITC action is the way to go. You can get a quick exclusion order potentially, and I would expect you might be able to get a law firm to take this on pro bono as it will generate a lot of publicity.

Regards,

Jeff