> Android incorporates a patched GPLv2 Linux kernel. This has nothing to do with "So we have broad adoption of GPL software". Android (AOSP) is Apache. We don'

> Android incorporates a patched GPLv2 Linux kernel. This has nothing to do with "So we have broad adoption of GPL software". Android (AOSP) is Apache. We don't have "broad adoption of GPL software". This scenario doesn't exist. If the software of the TV is GPLv2, you must have access to the source code (even with Apache this can happen to some extent). The TV manufacturer must give you the source code of the software running on the TV (with GPLv3 they should also guarantee that you can re-flash your devices). This of course is an ideal world, and it's the freedom FSF searches for. This way, you (or someone else) can audit the source code and check for spywares. You might be able to rebuild and reflash the software. Unfortunately not everything is open source. On Linux you have (for example) NVIDIA drivers that are closed source. You can put a spyware in there, even if Linux is GPLv2. EDIT: btw, you first asked "What’s the next step?". I believe the next step is to raise awareness of the rights one has over GPLvX software and to be able to truly enforce those rights. Like if you ask Samsung for the source code of your TV and they don't give it to you, you can (like) go to the nearest police station and press charges.