Even while Cisco Systems is action Apple for violating its iPhone trademark , an open - source enthusiast is impeach Cisco itself of infringing right of first publication in the same product .

Cisco has not release the source code for some components of the WIP300 iPhone in accordance with its open - source licensing agreement , said Armijn Hemel , a consultant with Loohuis Consulting and half of the team operate theGPL Violations Project , an governance that identifies and publicizes abuse of GPL ( GNU General Public License ) licenses and get some violators to court .

The WIP300 iPhone is ground on Linux , and Cisco has agreed to comply with the damage of the open - source GPL license for use the software program . The GPL licence involve the company to bring out the codification that it uprise for the phone .

industriousness experts say that open - source software users , let in party and mortal , commonly flunk to share their developments . Sometimes that ’s because they may misunderstand how unresolved - source package works but it may also be because publish the code can be a cumbersome and expensive process .

Hemel download the firmware for the WIP300 earpiece and reverse - organise it , first checking with a attorney that such a physical process is legal , he said . He then divulge that Cisco has neglected to share the codification for a couple of programs in the telephone , let in the Memory Technology equipment which is used to program the Flash memory , he said .

Hemel also found standardised omission in other Cisco product and contacted the company to coiffure a meeting . “ I just bombarded the Linksys physical contact in the Netherlands . I suppose they got fertilise up and arranged the call , ” he said . Linksys is a unit of Cisco .

The Cisco representatives he finally talked to in a conference call on Oct. 30 were very undecided to his report , he articulate . The company later on fixed omission on a few products that Hemel identified , include the EFG250 storage gimmick as well as an cyberspace camera and router , he say .

But Cisco has yet to publish the relevant computer code from the WIP300 iPhone , Hemel articulate . He decided to talk about his findings now because “ the timing is just pure , ” he said . “ For someone talking about Apple using Cisco ’s prop , actually they ’re conflict on right of first publication themselves . So it ’s just a doubled banner . ”

Last workweek , Cisco file a suit burden Apple with hallmark infringement since Apple introduced a mobile phone address the iPhone .

Hemel did n’t actually identify for Cisco the specific codification that has n’t been published . “ I ’m not going to do their work for them , ” he order . He suspects that a large company like Cisco might employ various coder mayhap from outsource troupe around the globe for produce a product like the iPhone . That might make it hard and potentially expensive for Cisco to decent document and describe for all the code in the phone , he say .

Cisco representatives did not immediately answer to phone call and e - ring mail made on Wednesday ask for gossip .

If Cisco is violating the terms of the GPL license in the iPhone , it for sure is n’t alone . “ It occurs more frequently than we ’d care to see , ” said Shane Coughlan , Freedom Task Force coordinator for theFree Software Foundation Europe . The problem is that many organizations do n’t quite in full read the conception of free software package and often do n’t have appropriate policies that enable them to comply with their software package licensing agreements , he said .

“ If you ’re used to buy codification and used to owning it , it ’s unmanageable to understand get computer code that is own by thousands , ” he said . “ A tidy sum of caller have been full in test to get along into complaisance and figure out how sustainable compliance can be put in in company policy . ”

There are repercussions to fail to abide by with an undecided - reference license . The GPL Violations Project has successfully enforce 100 violations .

In accession , an individual who contributed to software package that someone else flush it to decent apply under a permission can take the licensee to homage and look for fiscal recompense for right of first publication violations , sound out Coughlan .