[Discuss] Fwd: Hey FCC, Don't Lock Down Our Wi-Fi Routers | WIRED

[bogstad at pobox.com (Bill Bogstad)]

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Rich Pieri <richard.pieri at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/6/2015 10:40 PM, Bill Bogstad wrote:
>>
>> Given that the majority of cheap home routers do ship with GPL'ed
>> software (i.e. the Linux kernel), I am having a real problem
>> understanding this argument.   Some GPL'ed code is okay whereas other
>> GPL'ed code is toxic?  Or maybe it has something to do with code that
>> they change vs. simply compile?   Okay, I'm going to stop guessing
>> now.   Please explain if possible.
>
>
> Because you're on an unrelated tangent? The point was about the OEMs which
> don't open things up, not the ones which do (and yes, I realize just how
> incorrect I was for naming D-Link and TP-Link).

There are lots of cheap routers out there and their relationship to
GPLed software
is certainly varied.   It ranges from having no GPLed software at all
(for example using a VXworks RTOS) to a fully open system for which
the manufacturer provides full and complete source for all? software
as well as making it easy to flash users' own firmware images.
With the exception of Apple and their AirPort products, I'm not aware
of any "manufacturer" of products of this type who doesn't frequently
sell products using the Linux kernel (i.e. GPLed software).

That's not to say that they don't put proprietary software on top of
the Linux kernel or even always make the required sources for the
Linux kernel available.   From what I can tell, the GPLed Linux kernel
doesn't scare them enough so they won't ship it if it allows them to
ship faster with the features they want.   What they don't do is take
the extra step to make it easy (possible?) for end users to build and
install customized firmware images.  If you have examples; besides
Apple; of companies who don't sometimes ship products in this space
with Linux kernels then your arguments about liability issues of GPLed
software or FSF? lawsuits would make more sense to me.   As it is, it
seems to me that there must be some other reason that they don't just
ship something like OpenWrt.   I have my own theories involving the
code they get from the chip manufacturers and their unwillingness to
wait for OpenWrt to get around to supporting new hardware.

Bill Bogstad