"Litigants have sometimes requested remedies outside the scope of busybox itself, such as review authority over unrelated products, or right of refusal over non-busybox modules"
If you're in compliance for the kernel and all the other GPL code on your device then there's no justifiable reason for the SFC to ask to see unrelated code. The only reason for this to be a concern to anyone is if they're simultaneously violating the license of Busybox and some other GPLed component.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: wrong motivation ascribed
Date: 2012-01-31 06:38 pm (UTC)"Litigants have sometimes requested remedies outside the scope of busybox itself, such as review authority over unrelated products, or right of refusal over non-busybox modules"
If you're in compliance for the kernel and all the other GPL code on your device then there's no justifiable reason for the SFC to ask to see unrelated code. The only reason for this to be a concern to anyone is if they're simultaneously violating the license of Busybox and some other GPLed component.