Neil Brown wrote on Wednesday, 16 April:
> Do you have standard list of questions / pieces of evidence you tend
> to collate in your triage process, which could be used as a framework
> here?
Josh alread posted some of FSF's thoughts on this.
Here's a brief list of the main things I ask for on a new enforcement
matter:
* a copy of the manual (to check to see if an offer for source is
present)
* transcripts of online chats for source requests and/or emails of the
same.
* A URL of the firmware being distributed publicly (if it is).
* If not, a camera phone picture or something else from the device's
screen that shows clearly it's running GPL'd software. (e.g., a
good shot of Linux booting is helpful).
Basically, since GPL violators so often stonewall and refuse to act
until legal action is taken, I don't even open any GPL violation matter
where the evidence that a violation has occurred wouldn't pass Rule 11
of the USA's Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Frankly, so many
violators say "fine, sue us" that you have to assume every violation
matter you open will have to eventually go to litigation to get
resolved.
> We discussed - ooh, a few years ago now - the idea of some kind of
> "first steps on handling violations" guide, but never developed it
> further. If there is a good basis out there, it would be great not to
> re-invent the wheel!
Some of this is already in the tutorial book I've been putting together
(see: https://www.gitorious.org/gpl-compliance-tools/tutorial/ )
However, more about reporting and documenting violations is needed in
that. Patches welcome!
--
-- bkuhn
