TCL Smartphone Kernel Source Code

[jasonmerc]

Hello,

This repository only seems to be for the kernel source of TCL TVs. I was wondering where I could find a repo for TCL's smartphone kernel source. Specifically, I am looking for the TCL Ion V (T607DL) kernel source.

Thanks in advance.

[Krush206]

Send an e-mail to xiaolong2.meng@tcl.com.

[jasonmerc]

How'd you find this email?

[Krush206]

This is the e-mail address I originally received the source code from. I had a hard time contacting the TCL headquarters. Fortunately, after contacting SFC, the TCL headquarters provided prompt service.

However, the correct method to obtain the source code is contacting the local subsidiary. Unfortunately, not all subsidiaries have adequate structure. In Brazil, the subsidiary does lack structure for licensing resolutions.

I contacted the local subsidiary several times, but they always respond no information may be given. Other times, they respond the source code is maintained by Google. These failures represent attacks to the right to be informed and right to choose, under consumer rights.

Where are you located? Consumer rights are almost global. The UN have adopted consumer rights since 1985. Depending on your location, you may try to file a complaint at BBB or FTC.

[jasonmerc]

Located in the US. I've filed complaints like this several times in the past. Nothing ever happens here. Direct emails will help though, thank you. Now I can directly bother the company until they give me what I want.

[Krush206]

You should file a state complaint. This is more effective than BBB and FTC.

[Krush206]

May you also ask them for source code of software licensed under the terms of the BSD license, @jasonmerc? I came to realize the BSD license allows for source code disclosure. The BSD family of licenses are unusually compatible with consumer rights. The licenses cope well with the right to be informed. If a consumer owns a product which includes software under a BSD license, they're legally eligible to obtain the sources. When a company states that the product includes software under a BSD license, it is making a representation. The core feature of these licenses is the freedom to use, modify, and redistribute the source code. By failing to provide a way to use the source code, the company is making a material omission. It is omitting the crucial fact that the advertised open nature of the software is practically inaccessible. A reasonable consumer, seeing that a product uses open-source software, would be led to believe they can benefit from the openness of the software (e.g., for security audits, community repairs, modifications). Denying use misleads the consumer about this essential characteristic.

[jasonmerc]

BSD allows for disclosure but doesn't mandate it. GPL mandates it. If a compiled binary was released to the public, the full source must also be released for GPL licensed code.