6 ms·

Isn’t this a requirement of the GPL license? Or am I mistaken?

clhodapp 8y ago
Yes. From a certain point of view: Tesla have been blatantly illegally stealing code for years and are only now finally beginning to properly secure a license for some of it.
- sametmax 8y ago
  Like thousands of companies unfortunaly. The fsf has not intension to enforce legally the licence, which kinda make it moot.
asdsa5325 8y ago
Yes, it's just GPL
taneq 8y ago
It's a requirement, but there's some discretion as to how and when source is released. Companies can drag their heels and draw out the process. It's good to see that this is moving in the right direction. (BMW is another big company which, afaik, has done even better with their compliance efforts: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/30/bmw_complies_with_gpl/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/30/bmw_complies_with_g...)
mehrdadn 8y ago
If my memory serves correctly [1] releasing the source proactively is not a requirement; the requirement is that the source be made available upon request. So presumably they wouldn't have to do this until someone demanded it. [1] I'm not entirely sure which clause I picked this up from (it's been a few years), but this clause I can right now seems to say the same thing: Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that [...] you receive source code or can get it if you want it [...]
- mikekchar 8y ago
  You are correct. Also, it's only a requirement to give the source code to someone you have given the binary to. It's not the case that someone can say "Oh you used GPL code in your software, you have to give me the source code". In fact, not even the author of the original source code can demand the changes unless they also received a binary from downstream.
  - mehrdadn 8y ago
    Right. Do you know if it counts as giving someone the binary if you give them a car that has the binary loaded?
    - sametmax 8y ago
      Yes.
      - mikekchar 8y ago
        Brevity is a virtue, but I just want to expand slightly: if you have paid for the car, then you have paid for he source code. That's what the license says. It is your legal right. There is a lot of talk about copyleft, but it is at its simplest a consumer rights issue. Not everybody is entitled to that source code, but if you've bought it, then you are.
- Jasper_ 8y ago
  The Software Freedom Conservancy was the party that asked Tesla to release their software to be GPL compliant: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2018/may/18/tesla-incomplete-ccs/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2018/may/18/tesla-incomplete-...

Yes. From a certain point of view: Tesla have been blatantly illegally stealing code for years and are only now finally beginning to properly secure a license for some of it.

sametmax 8y ago
Like thousands of companies unfortunaly. The fsf has not intension to enforce legally the licence, which kinda make it moot.

asdsa5325 8y ago

Yes, it's just GPL

taneq 8y ago

It's a requirement, but there's some discretion as to how and when source is released. Companies can drag their heels and draw out the process. It's good to see that this is moving in the right direction. (BMW is another big company which, afaik, has done even better with their compliance efforts: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/30/bmw_complies_with_gpl/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/30/bmw_complies_with_g...)

mehrdadn 8y ago

If my memory serves correctly [1] releasing the source proactively is not a requirement; the requirement is that the source be made available upon request. So presumably they wouldn't have to do this until someone demanded it. [1] I'm not entirely sure which clause I picked this up from (it's been a few years), but this clause I can right now seems to say the same thing: Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that [...] you receive source code or can get it if you want it [...]

mikekchar 8y ago
You are correct. Also, it's only a requirement to give the source code to someone you have given the binary to. It's not the case that someone can say "Oh you used GPL code in your software, you have to give me the source code". In fact, not even the author of the original source code can demand the changes unless they also received a binary from downstream.
- mehrdadn 8y ago
  Right. Do you know if it counts as giving someone the binary if you give them a car that has the binary loaded?
  - sametmax 8y ago
    Yes.
    - mikekchar 8y ago
      Brevity is a virtue, but I just want to expand slightly: if you have paid for the car, then you have paid for he source code. That's what the license says. It is your legal right. There is a lot of talk about copyleft, but it is at its simplest a consumer rights issue. Not everybody is entitled to that source code, but if you've bought it, then you are.
Jasper_ 8y ago
The Software Freedom Conservancy was the party that asked Tesla to release their software to be GPL compliant: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2018/may/18/tesla-incomplete-ccs/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2018/may/18/tesla-incomplete-...