2 ms·

I didn’t imply that they are not GPL compliant. I stated it directly. I’m not interested in onyx’s products because they are a shitty company. I don’t have the

I didn’t imply that they are not GPL compliant. I stated it directly. I’m not interested in onyx’s products because they are a shitty company. I don’t have the time, energy, resources or motivations to improve a shitty company. I do have the time, energy, resources and motivation to share this singular fact with others so they can make their own choice about which companies they support.

robinsoh 4y ago
> I didn’t imply that they are not GPL compliant. I stated it directly. That's good. It would be even better to show that they are GPL non-compliant by showing their response and confirming they're not willing to comply. As you said, you're not able to, and that's fine, I'm just saying it would be even better if you could. > I do have the time, energy, resources and motivation to share this singular fact with others so they can make their own choice about which companies they support. That's fine.
- chaostheory 4y ago
  The burden of proof is on Onyx, and not some random commenter who mentioned that there's no proof that they're GPL compliant. No one can seem to find a link to the source code. Maybe Onyx should make it easier to find?
  - robinsoh 4y ago
    > The burden of proof is on Onyx, and not some random commenter who mentioned that there's no proof that they're GPL compliant. I agree with you that Onyx is likely in violation of the GPL. That said, the way I'm used to things is; the person who alleges a crime is committed is the one that has to show evidence. Onyx doesn't have to prove they're innocent. The prosecution has to prove they're guilty. So if we want to see Onyx punished, then we need to find someone who owns an Onyx that has asked Onyx to comply with the GPL and provide source, and showing that they refused to do so. At that point, they would immediately be non-compliant and thus susceptible to many injunctions, meaning their products could be stopped at the border. Pretty sure they'd pay attention to that.
    - wfhordie 4y ago
      Here ya go. Asked and answered. http://bbs.onyx-international.com/t/install-linux-or-alternate-os-and-gpl2-kernel-source/698/5 http://bbs.onyx-international.com/t/install-linux-or-alterna...
      - chaostheory 4y ago
        Thank you. I'm glad I didn't buy a boox. I was seriously contemplating it, and I was not aware of any of these issues until now. That forum thread is enlightening.
      - robinsoh 4y ago
        > Here ya go. Asked and answered. I see the link shows a forum discussion. I guess I was looking for something more like: So if we want to see Onyx punished, then we need to find someone who owns an Onyx that has asked Onyx to comply with the GPL and provide source, and showing that they refused to do so. At that point, they would immediately be non-compliant and thus susceptible to many injunctions, meaning their products could be stopped at the border. Pretty sure they'd pay attention to that. It needs to be a clear formal request with proof of ownership and failure of the supplier to provide source for the GPL to be applicable.
        wfhordie 4y ago
        >then we need to find someone who owns an Onyx that has asked Onyx to comply with the GPL and provide source, and showing that they refused to do so. That's in the link I provided. Unfortunately, there isn't an automatic enforcement mechanism for cross-border GPL violations. There aren't lawyers waiting in the wings to file lawsuits on behalf of hackers who want to own their device. There isn't a framework for reporting these violations to any higher authority to advocate for us. I wish it were the case, but it's not.
        robinsoh 4y ago
        Sorry, but to be very clear, all I see in the link is just a forum discussion. No clear request showing ownership and right to claim source code, no clear response from someone clearly representing the distributor of the product saying no source code shall be provided. There is gpl-violations.org. Has anyone tried them?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

robinsoh 4y ago

> I didn’t imply that they are not GPL compliant. I stated it directly. That's good. It would be even better to show that they are GPL non-compliant by showing their response and confirming they're not willing to comply. As you said, you're not able to, and that's fine, I'm just saying it would be even better if you could. > I do have the time, energy, resources and motivation to share this singular fact with others so they can make their own choice about which companies they support. That's fine.

chaostheory 4y ago
The burden of proof is on Onyx, and not some random commenter who mentioned that there's no proof that they're GPL compliant. No one can seem to find a link to the source code. Maybe Onyx should make it easier to find?
- robinsoh 4y ago
  > The burden of proof is on Onyx, and not some random commenter who mentioned that there's no proof that they're GPL compliant. I agree with you that Onyx is likely in violation of the GPL. That said, the way I'm used to things is; the person who alleges a crime is committed is the one that has to show evidence. Onyx doesn't have to prove they're innocent. The prosecution has to prove they're guilty. So if we want to see Onyx punished, then we need to find someone who owns an Onyx that has asked Onyx to comply with the GPL and provide source, and showing that they refused to do so. At that point, they would immediately be non-compliant and thus susceptible to many injunctions, meaning their products could be stopped at the border. Pretty sure they'd pay attention to that.
  - wfhordie 4y ago
    Here ya go. Asked and answered. http://bbs.onyx-international.com/t/install-linux-or-alternate-os-and-gpl2-kernel-source/698/5 http://bbs.onyx-international.com/t/install-linux-or-alterna...
    - chaostheory 4y ago
      Thank you. I'm glad I didn't buy a boox. I was seriously contemplating it, and I was not aware of any of these issues until now. That forum thread is enlightening.
    - robinsoh 4y ago
      > Here ya go. Asked and answered. I see the link shows a forum discussion. I guess I was looking for something more like: So if we want to see Onyx punished, then we need to find someone who owns an Onyx that has asked Onyx to comply with the GPL and provide source, and showing that they refused to do so. At that point, they would immediately be non-compliant and thus susceptible to many injunctions, meaning their products could be stopped at the border. Pretty sure they'd pay attention to that. It needs to be a clear formal request with proof of ownership and failure of the supplier to provide source for the GPL to be applicable.
      - wfhordie 4y ago
        >then we need to find someone who owns an Onyx that has asked Onyx to comply with the GPL and provide source, and showing that they refused to do so. That's in the link I provided. Unfortunately, there isn't an automatic enforcement mechanism for cross-border GPL violations. There aren't lawyers waiting in the wings to file lawsuits on behalf of hackers who want to own their device. There isn't a framework for reporting these violations to any higher authority to advocate for us. I wish it were the case, but it's not.
        robinsoh 4y ago
        Sorry, but to be very clear, all I see in the link is just a forum discussion. No clear request showing ownership and right to claim source code, no clear response from someone clearly representing the distributor of the product saying no source code shall be provided. There is gpl-violations.org. Has anyone tried them?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]