I have been checking on some internet forums and saw that the Phantom 3 firmware has many source code fragments so they should have the firmware sources available to everyone.
Hi!, i am referring to the firmware source code. I think that they should have it somewhere, as they have some GPL code inside the firmware. I have not seen it published neither, that is why i ask
They probably will not release the source code as that is usually proprietary. I believe using open source only requires you to list it as a source in the licensing. You are able to view the source of each open source project but I don't think they are required to release any code they make building on open source.
There are various open source licenses. Some are copy left like GPL where if you use GPL code within your application you need to release the source code of your application as this now falls under the GPL license. Other open source licenses like BSD do not have this restriction so you do not need to release your source code.
There are ways around GPL by ensuring when you use this code it is not part of your application Example calling application B from application A using available interfaces such as API's but you really need a IP lawyer to provide consultation before making any assumptions. Even if you look at another applications source code and then write your own version from scratch you could still be subject to releasing your code under GPL because the programmer could take concepts or ideas from the other code.
To accuse DJI of using GPL code in their firmware is a fairly strong statement. What GPL code do you believe they are using?
Sorry not an IP Lawyer but if Ambarella is releasing their software under GPL (are they ?) as the developers of the application they also reserve the right to release it under a separate licensee.
Are they just running their application on top on top of the linux kernal and including this in their package and that is why the Linux signature comes up. You see this with appliances like google nest etc. Does that mean they need to release there source code when they package with the linux kernal NO IDEA but I am the last person who is going to accuse them of non compliance of software licenses.
Again I don't know the companies involved do not provide dual licensing example MySQL I can buy a commercial license from Oracle and I don't have to release my code if I use it in a commercial product or I can use the GPL in my product for free and release the code. Dual licensing is fairly common practice so I am not about to assume this is not the case.