3 ms·

If no one used it then there is no difference from it being closed source so there is no reason not to open source it.

• wmf 6y ago
  No, GPL compliance has significant cost, especially if the company doesn't know what they're doing.
  • cycloptic 6y ago
    It would be nice if there was less misinformation out there about what the cost actually is. Companies are required to pay that cost if they intend to ship Linux legally. They should not be using Linux otherwise.
  • rvense 6y ago
    Not sure I agree there's a big cost if you do know what you're doing, THB. I'm notsure about Yocto, but I think the buildroot system has GPL compliance baked in. Like packages have licenses and you can export a dump of what you're required to provide. If you're using a proper distro it should be even easier.
    • ece 6y ago
      I think he's talking about companies that don't know what they're doing. Keeping track of changes is one thing, but even if it takes companies like Tesla years to become compliant, it's seems pretty clear that companies might not know what they should do once they start shipping devices. Raising awareness and offering alternatives all seems good, but I still hope litigation is a last ditch effort.