Ben Sturmfels
531a97a3c9
The directory nesting is unnecessary here and confusing to navigate. I've moved all apps to the project subdirectory, currently called "www", but soon to be renamed "conservancy". I've also moved manage.py to the top-level directory.
52 lines
4.6 KiB
HTML
52 lines
4.6 KiB
HTML
{% extends "base_vizio.html" %}
|
|
{% block subtitle %}Copyleft Compliance Projects - {% endblock %}
|
|
{% block submenuselection %}VizioMain{% endblock %}
|
|
{% block content %}
|
|
|
|
<h1>Current Status of Vizio Case</h1>
|
|
|
|
<p>We are awaiting the state judge's ruling on Vizio's motion for <a href="/copyleft-compliance/glossary.html#summary-judgment">summary judgment</a>.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3>History of Vizio Case</h3>
|
|
<p>On October 19, 2021, SFC filed a third-party beneficiary contract <a href="https://sfconservancy.org/docs/software-freedom-conservancy-v-vizio-complaint-2021-10-19.pdf">lawsuit</a> against Vizio in California State Court in Orange County, CA. Our <a href="/copyleft-compliance/glossary.html#complaint">complaint</a> demands <em>no financial compensation</em> but instead asks for what truly matters with regard to software rights and freedom: the "specific performance" (fulfilling a contract requirement in exactly the way the contract specifies) of production of complete, corresponding source code (CCS) — as defined in the various GPL Agreements (such as GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1).</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Vizio has still not provided CCS for their televisions to SFC, and so our lawsuit continues. Instead, Vizio <a href="/blog/2021/dec/28/vizio-update-1/">attempted to “remove”</a> the case to federal court (arguing that copyright claims <em>preempted</em> our third-party beneficiary contract claim). We <a href="/news/2022/may/16/vizio-remand-win/">succeeded in our motion to remand the case back to state court</a>; the federal judge <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808.30.0.pdf">agreed that our case included an “extra element”</a> not covered by copyright.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>After several months of litigation back in state court, Vizio <a href="https://sfconservancy.org/docs/2023-4-28_VIZIOs_Motion_for_Summary_Judgment_with_Reservation.pdf">filed for</a> <a href="/copyleft-compliance/glossary.html#summary-judgment">summary judgment</a> in the state court <em>again</em> arguing copyright preemption. The state court is not bound by the federal court's ruling against preemption, so Vizio was able to essentially re-argue its motion to dismiss. Vizio also argued that the GPL Agreements have no third-party beneficiaries (which is the first time Vizio has tried to attack these claims substantively). Currently, we are awaiting the judge's ruling on Vizio's motion for summary judgment.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>The case is currently set for trial to begin on March 25, 2024.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3>Portions of Interest from the Docket in the Vizio Case</h3>
|
|
|
|
Below are documents from the docket(s) in this SFC v. Vizio case of interest,
|
|
provided in (roughly) chronological order:
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<br>
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="https://sfconservancy.org/docs/software-freedom-conservancy-v-vizio-complaint-2021-10-19.pdf">SFC's
|
|
Original Complaint, 2021-10-19</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Removal (to federal court) and Remand (to state court)</li>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808.1.0.pdf">Vizio's Motion to Remove (to federal court)</li>
|
|
<li><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808.14.0_1.pdf">SFC's Motion to Remand (to state court)</li>
|
|
<li><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808.24.0_1.pdf">Vizio's Opposition of SFC's Motion to Remand (to state court)</li>
|
|
<li><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808.32.0.pdf">Transcript of the hearing of the motion to remand</a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808/gov.uscourts.cacd.837808.30.0.pdf"><strong>Decision by the federal court to remand the case to state court</strong></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
|
|
<li>Vizio's Motion for Summary Judgement</li>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a href="https://sfconservancy.org/docs/2023-4-28_VIZIOs_Motion_for_Summary_Judgment_with_Reservation.pdf">Vizio's Motion for Summary Judgment</li>
|
|
<li><a href="https://sfconservancy.org/docs/SFC_response_to_summary_judgement.pdf">SFC's response to Vizio's Motion for Summary Judgment</li>
|
|
<li><a href="https://sfconservancy.org/docs/Vizio_summary_judgement_reply_brief.pdf">Vizio's reply to SFC's response to Vizio's Motion for Summary Judgment</a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="https://sfconservancy.org/docs/Transcript_Full_Vizios_MSJ_HearingDeptC-33.231005.pdf">Full transcript from the hearing</a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<h3>MEDIA CONTACT</h3>
|
|
|
|
You can reach out media team at <a href="mailto:media@sfconservancy.org"><media@sfconservancy.org></a></p>
|
|
|
|
{% endblock %}
|