diff --git a/presentations/ccs-report-examples/ccs-examples.md b/presentations/ccs-report-examples/ccs-examples.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8a99469
--- /dev/null
+++ b/presentations/ccs-report-examples/ccs-examples.md
@@ -0,0 +1,766 @@
+% A Practical Guide to Compliance with the GNU GPL
+% Bradley M. Kuhn and Karen M. Sandler
+% Thursday 19 January 2016
+
+
+# Audience
+
++ Our goal here is to move faster or slower based on audience knowledge.
+
++ There are folks in this audience who have worked with this stuff for years,
+ and those who are completely new.
+
++ We want these presentations to be valuable to all of you.
+
+# Audience
+
++ Please, don't be embarrassed:
+ + Ever GPL expert in the world, including us, started as a student who
+ knew none of this.
+
++ This is a course; raise your hand if you are confused or have a question.
+
++ We are glad to go "off-slides" and get your questions answered.
+
+# The Tutorial's Textbook
+
++ This tutorial actually has a 125-page textbook.
+
++ You can download it (PDF or online HTML browse, or the source code!) from
+ [copyleft.org/guide](https://copyleft.org/guide)
+
++ The text is in integration and culmination of every freely licensed
+ material on copyleft (and GPL in particular) we could find.
+
++ We don't mind if you read the text while we talk and raise your hand with questions.
+
+# How this Tutorial Go?
+
++ Materials presented will mix the simple & complex.
+
++ We cannot possibly cover the entire GPL and compliance procedures in merely
+ two hours.
+ + a full course could take a whole day or more.
+ + but we'll give you the key highlights.
+
+# Outline
+
++ Discuss: motivations, origins, then a few of GPL's sections.
+
++ Turn to focus to how it relates to meeting the requirements of the license
+ (aka compliance).
+
++ If you haven't asked enough questions at that point, we'll then still have
+ lots of time at the end to take questions and answer them.
+
+# Why Listen To Us?
+
++ Conservancy operates and practices license compliance activities extremely transparently.
+
++ So you have access to drafters, interpreters, enforcers.
+
++ Someday, we may (or already have) sit across the table from you.
+
++ Our transparency does make your job easier.
+
+# The Mindset of GPL
+
++ GPL protects software freedom.
+
++ Ultimate goal: make sure every user has the four freedoms.
+ + Freedom to run the software.
+ + Freedom to study and modify the software.
+ + Freedom to share the software.
+ + Freedom to distribute modified versions.
+
++ Every clause in GPL was designed to uphold one of these freedoms.
+ + Or, it's a compromise of drafting in adoption vs. freedom debate.
+
+# Using Copyright
+
++ GPL is primarily a copyright license.
+ + Software is copyrighted.
+ + License grants key freedoms.
+ + Requirement prohibit activities that take away freedoms.
+
++ General concept: copyleft.
+
++ Specific implementation: GPL.
+
+# Conditional Permissions
+
++ A copyleft license grants copyright permissions, conditionally.
+
++ Think of the phrase: “provided that”
+
++ “provided that”: appears (in some form) only
+ + 4 times in GPLv2
+ + 9 times in GPLv3.
+
+# Compare To Proprietary Licenses
+
++ Yes, the GPL has its requirements.
+
++ But *none* of these activities are ever permitted under proprietary
+ licenses.
+
++ If you don't like what the GPL requires you to do, then just use
+ proprietary software instead.
+
++ That way, you know the answer to every “Am I allowed to?” question is “no”
+
++ rather than: “yes, but only as long as you …”
+
++ Many business advantages to copyleft...
+
+# The Technical Gap
+
++ Understanding GPL well requires a some software expertise & legal
+ expertise.
+
++ You don't have to be a professional on either side to grok it.
+ + but you're best off if you're a professional in one & an amateur
+ in the other.
+
++ Most important technical concepts you need:
+ + source code, binaries, methods of distribution.
+
+# Modification As a Center Provision
+
++ GPL's primary copyright hook is copyright controls on the right to modify.
+
++ GPL's central tenant:
+
++ You can make a modified version of various types privately as much as you'd like.
+
++ When you distribute that modified version, you have requirements to meet.
+
++ Technological considerations dictate necessity of more complex rules for
+certain types of modifications.
+
+# GPLv2 § 2(a-b)
+
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>[GPLv2§]2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any
+portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
+distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above,
+provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
+<br/>
+<br/>
+a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating
+that you changed the files and the date of any change.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
+whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
+part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
+parties under the terms of this License.
+</p>
+</span>
+
+# GPLv3§5(a-c)
+
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>
+You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
+produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the
+terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
+<br/>
+<br/>
+a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and
+giving a relevant date.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is released under
+this License and any conditions added under section 7. This requirement
+modifies the requirement in section 4 to "keep intact all notices".
+<br/>
+<br/>
+c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to anyone
+who comes into possession of a copy. This License will therefore apply,
+along with any applicable section 7 additional terms, to the whole of the
+work, and all its parts, regardless of how they are packaged. This License
+gives no permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not
+invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.
+</p>
+</span>
+
+# GPLv2§2¶ penultimates
+
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>
+These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
+identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
+and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
+themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
+sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
+distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
+on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
+this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
+entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
+your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
+exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
+collective works based on the Program.
+</p>
+
+</span>
+
+# GPLv3 §0 ¶1-5
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>
+ "Copyright" also means copyright-like laws that apply to other kinds of
+works, such as semiconductor masks.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+ "The Program" refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this
+License. Each licensee is addressed as "you". "Licensees" and
+"recipients" may be individuals or organizations.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
+in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an
+exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the
+earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+ A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based
+on the Program.
+</p>
+
+# Binaries (Object Code) are Modifications
+
++ Software that the computer understands is different than software humans
+ read.
+
++ There is often a process required to modify (and/or translate) the software
+ from human-readable
+ + This process can be done ahead of time.
+
++ Separation of source and binary was the first way proprietary software
+ companies discovered to subjugate users.
+ + GPL uses the fact that binaries are modifications (which are often
+ distribution) to prevent that subjugation.
+
+# GPLv2 § 3(a-b)
+
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>
+<p>[GPLv2§]3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
+under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
+Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
+<br/>
+<br/>
+a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
+source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
+1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
+<br/>
+<br/>
+b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
+years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
+cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
+machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
+distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
+customarily used for software interchange;
+</p>
+</span>
+
+# GPLv3 § 6(a-b)
+
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>
+[GPLv3 § ] 6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms
+of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the
+machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License,
+in one of these ways:
+<br/>
+<br/>
+a) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
+(including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the
+Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium
+customarily used for software interchange.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
+(including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a
+written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as
+long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product
+model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a
+copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the
+product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical
+medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no
+more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this
+conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the
+Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.
+</p>
+</span>
+
+# GPLv3 § 1 ¶ 1, 4-6
+
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>
+The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work
+for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source
+form of a work.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all the
+source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the
+object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those
+activities. However, it does not include the work's System Libraries, or
+general-purpose tools or generally available free programs which are used
+unmodified in performing those activities but which are not part of the work.
+For example, Corresponding Source includes interface definition files
+associated with source files for the work, and the source code for shared
+libraries and dynamically linked subprograms that the work is specifically
+designed to require, such as by intimate data communication or control flow
+between those subprograms and other parts of the work.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+The Corresponding Source need not include anything that users
+can regenerate automatically from other parts of the Corresponding
+Source.
+<br/>
+<br/>
+The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that
+same work.
+</p>
+</span>
+
+# What's a GPL Violation?
+
++ GPL (both v2 and v3) require:
+ + The whole work licensed under GPL.
+ + (which means all copyrighted material added must be under
+ GPL-compatible licenses.)
+ + Complete, Corresponding Source (CCS) of that work provided, under GPL.
+
++ The licenses terminate upon violation …
+ + … thus failure to comply means lost distribution rights.
+ + … enforcement uses this rights termination as leverage to
+ restore compliance.
+
+# Enforcement is Technical
+
++ Copyleft's policy goals related to technical acts.
+ + modifying, building, and installing software is a technical process.
+
++ In embedded systems, this process is rarely straightforward.
+ + Yet GPL requires that such be possible.
+
++ In enforcement, we talk about “the CCS adequately meeting GPL's requirements”
+
+# Compliance-Friendly Development
+
++ Use revision control ...
+ - ... to pull in vendor branch.
+ - ... to tag releases.
+
++ Avoid "Build Guru" ...
+ - ... by documenting build process.
+ - ... and versioning it, too.
+
+# GPL Binary Requirements
+
+(v2 § 3, v3 § 6)
+
++ Four options:
+ - Source alongside binary (v2/v3).
+ - Offer for source (v2/v3).
+ - Internet side-by-side distribution (v3).
+ - Torrent distribution (v3).
+
+# Source Alongside Binary
+
++ Simplest option
+
++ **Obligations end at distribution time.**
+
++ Physical media required.
+
+# Offer For Source
+
++ Useful if not shipping CD already.
+
++ Lasts three years.
+
++ Mail fulfillment required (not in v3).
+
+# Side-By-Side Distribution
+
++ Not in GPLv2, pedantically speaking.
+
++ Always been considered compliant for v2.
+
++ v3 clarifies this.
+
+# Peer-to-Peer Distribution
+
++ v2 obviously couldn't consider this.
+
++ v3 allows distribution of equally seeded source and binary.
+
+# Preparing Corresponding Source
+
+(v2 § 3, v3 § 1)
+
++ Make sure all sources are present.
+ - revision system helps a lot here.
+
++ Build scripts
+ - make sure someone skilled in art can build it.
+
+# Termination
+
+(v2 § 4, v3 § 8)
+
++ v2 is automatic and permanent.
+
++ v3 has auto-reinstatement.
+ - 60 day self-correction timeout.
+ - 30 day penalty-less after notice.
+
++ Usually, you need copyright holder to reinstate.
+
+# Actual Enforcement
+
++ [*The Principles of Community-Oriented GPL Enforcement* at sfconservancy.org/linux-compliance/principles.html](https://sfconservancy.org/linux-compliance/principles.html).
+
++ Send a Letter, carefully finding right person.
+
++ Communication is key.
+
++ Ask for CCS candidates.
+
+
+# The "Rounds"
+
++ Ideally (it's only happened to me twice) the first source release is
+ perfect.
+ + but we don't live in an ideal world.
+
++ The worst I've ever experienced is 22 rounds.
+
++ We send detailed reports.
+
+# No Build Instructions
+
+<hr/>
+ The primary issues we found were a dearth of build instructions as well
+ as a complete lack of installation instructions. There was no
+ information that mentioned how one might build each package so we had to
+ guess about which Makefile and/or build script to run for each package.
+ And in many cases it was not possible or straight-forward to build - this
+ must be resolved in the next source candidate.
+
+# Making General Recommendations
+
+<hr/>
+ We generally recommend that the source release be a single file (ie. one
+ tarball containing all packages required for the build) that includes a
+ README or similar in the main directory explaining exactly how to build
+ and install all of the packages. See section 21.2 of
+ http://compliance.guide/pristine-example for an excellent example.
+
+# Suspicious, But Not Captious.
+
+<hr/>
+ Also, we noticed that some packages mentioned in the "OPEN SOURCE
+ SOFTWARE NOTICE" included with the device (and also downloaded as part of
+ the source release; see
+ Open_Source_Software_Notice_and_Privacy_Policy.pdf ) could not be found
+ in the source release. For example, we found "Software: Samba 3.0.XX" in
+ the notice, but could not find any trace of Samba in the source release.
+ Please ensure that all the software included in the notice is included in
+ the source release as well.
+
+# Nesting Doll Packages
+
+<hr/>
+
+ Once extracted, the 3 .rar files above produce the following output
+ files:
+ * busybox-1.21.1.rar
+ * AB_A0101.123.tar.gz
+ * source.rar
+ * a small text file that gives two-word descriptions of the above files
+
+
+# Actual(ly Trying to) Build
+
+<hr/>
+
+ This file included no instructions for how one might build it so we
+ tried to run "make" but received the following error:
+
+ $ make
+ .../busybox-1.21.1/scripts/gcc-version.sh: line 11:
+ arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc: command not found
+
+# Toolchain?
+
++ The toolchain is rarely considered mandatory as part of “the
+ scripts”.
+
++ Admittedly, it doesn't *control* compilation, it *is* compilation.
+
++ The script here is explaining precisely what type of toolchain is needed.
+
++ Something like: “GCC vX built with the following ./configure
+ line” is usually adequate.
+
++ But including the toolchain is a nice step to make it easy for your users.
+
+<hr>
+> the scripts used to **control compilation** and installation of the executable.
+
+<p align=right>
+— GPLv2§3
+</p>
+</span>
+
+# We Guess at Compiler Anyway
+
+<hr/>
+ So we searched for an arm-none-linux-gnueabi- cross-compiler in the
+ other files but could not find one. We then tried to use our own (be
+ editing the PATH appropriately), which did get us past this error. Note
+ that this is not acceptable in a source release - the cross-compiler
+ that a user must use needs to be clearly indicated (name, version, etc.)
+ and/or included with the source release.
+
+# Feedback on Small Problems
+
+<hr/>
+
+ Once we had the custom cross-compiler configured, we then ran into these
+ errors:
+
+ $ make
+ .../busybox-1.21.1/scripts/gen_build_files.sh: Permission denied
+ make: *** [gen_build_files] Error 127
+
+ $ make
+ .../busybox-1.21.1/scripts/mkconfigs: Permission denied
+ make: *** [include/config/MARKER] Error 126
+
+ $ make
+ /bin/sh: applets/usage_compressed: Permission denied
+ make[1]: *** [include/usage_compressed.h] Error 126
+ make: *** [applets_dir] Error 2
+
+ $ make
+ .../busybox-1.21.1/scripts/trylink: Permission denied
+ make: *** [busybox_unstripped] Error 126
+
+ In each case, we found the mentioned file and then added executable
+ permissions to it (ie. "chmod u+x scripts/gen_build_files.sh"). This
+ must be fixed in the next source release - please set the executable
+ bits on the above files appropriately in the archive file you
+ distribute.
+
+# Install Instructions missing
+
+<hr/>
+ After fixing the above, a "busybox" binary was generated. However,
+ there were no instructions to indicate how one might install this binary
+ on the device. Such instructions are required by GPLv2, under which
+ BusyBox is licensed. Please include the instructions in your next
+ source release.
+
+# Build "Only Seems" To build
+
+<hr/>
+ For the AAB_A0101.123.tar.gz package, we ran "./build.sh", the build
+ took about 140 seconds, which is less than one would expect for building
+ all of the programs listed in the "OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE NOTICE". The
+ only files we could immediately find that were clearly the result of
+ this "./build.sh" invocation were some kernel image binaries, found in
+ path/path/path/path/path/KERNEL_OBJ . This path was not mentioned at
+ all and we had to guess at where they might be.
+
+# Maybe Proprietary Kernel Modules?
+
+<hr/>
+ Furthermore, there were no .ko files generated, which is abnormal for a
+ build of the kernel, Linux. Please ensure that all .ko files which are
+ used on the system are generated with "./build.sh" or a similar script.
+
+# Weird versioning
+
+<hr/>
+
+ * The following libraries have different versions in the firmware than
+ is built from the candidate CCS. Specifically, your candidate CCS
+ contains version "1800", and the firmware has version "2400". Since
+ most of these libraries are licensed under the LGPL, you are required
+ to have the complete, corresponding source present for the correct
+ version as distributed in the firmware. You also must include the
+ "scripts to control compilation and installation of the executable".
+
+ * lib/libgio-2.0.so.0.2400.2
+ * lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.2400.2
+ * lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0.2400.2
+ * lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0.2400.2
+ * lib/libgthread-2.0.so.0.2400.2
+ * lib/libz.so.1.2.5 (version 1.2.2 is provided in the sources)
+
+# Weird Build Issues Over Many Candidates
+
+<hr/>
+ You mentioned in your Round 6 commentary that you have corrected the
+ thatlib issues. However, we are unable to see what you mean. There are
+ now two copies of thatlib, one in 2624.7_524/uclinux-rootfs/lib/thatlib/,
+ as well as the one in yourlibs. We aren't sure which one you intend to
+ be built to generate the binaries on the firmware. When we try to build
+ the yourlibs one from scratch, by cleaning the whole area, we get the
+ following build issues. Here's what we did:
+
+# Getting Really build-technical
+
+<hr/>
+
+ We ran:
+
+ make -C libsrc/thatlib install
+
+ which did not work because of a missing Makefile error. We read the
+ build source and discovered that the Makefile, etc, for that directory
+ is generated by running:
+
+ cd libsrc/thatlib/thatlib-0.9.22_mipsel-uclibc; sh configure_thatlib_mipsel-uclibc
+
+ Once we did that
+
+ make -C libsrc/thatlib install
+
+ worked correctly. The only remaining binaries were in build source and
+ discovered that the Makefile, etc, for that directory is generated by
+ running:
+
+ cd libsrc/thatlib/thatlib-0.9.22_mipsel-uclibc; sh configure_thatlib_mipsel-uclibc
+
+# Getting Really build-technical
+
+<hr/>
+
+ Once we did that
+
+ make -C libsrc/thatlib install
+
+ worked correctly. The only remaining binaries were in
+ ./libsrc/thatlib/\{YOURLIB_ROOT_DIR\}/ which looks like a build with a
+ misconfigured environment somehow, so we simply removed that
+ directory.
+
+ Then, after running make clean, thatlib failed with the following
+ errors. Random .o/.so files laying around in the thatlib source
+ directory, and then it failing to build correctly after they are
+ removed. If there some set of .so files you claim are not required
+ as part of the C&CS since thatlib is LGPL'd, we understand that, but
+ the rest of the sources must build and install those other .so's.
+ Here's the build error we get in the bdvdlibs version:
+
+# Getting Really build-technical
+
+<hr/>
+
+ mkdir .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp
+ (cd .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp && ar x ../../.libs/libthatlibwm_default.a)
+ mkdir .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp
+ (cd .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp && ar x ../../.libs/libthatlibwm_default.a)
+ /opt/toolchains/crosstools_sf-linux-2.6.18.0_gcc-4.2-9ts_uclibc-nptl-0.9.29-20070423_20080702/bin//mipsel-uclibc-
+ ld -o libthatlibwm_default.o -r .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp/*.o
+ /opt/toolchains/crosstools_sf-linux-2.6.18.0_gcc-4.2-9ts_uclibc-nptl-0.9.29-20070423_20080702/bin//mipsel-uclibc-
+ ld: .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp/default.o: Relocations in generic ELF (EM: 3)
+ /opt/toolchains/crosstools_sf-linux-2.6.18.0_gcc-4.2-9ts_uclibc-nptl-0.9.29-20070423_20080702/bin//mipsel-uclibc-
+ ld: .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp/default.o: Relocations in generic ELF (EM: 3)
+ /opt/toolchains/crosstools_sf-linux-2.6.18.0_gcc-4.2-9ts_uclibc-nptl-0.9.29-20070423_20080702/bin//mipsel-uclibc-
+ ld: .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp/default.o: Relocations in generic ELF (EM: 3)
+ /opt/toolchains/crosstools_sf-linux-2.6.18.0_gcc-4.2-9ts_uclibc-nptl-0.9.29-20070423_20080702/bin//mipsel-uclibc-
+ ld: .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp/default.o: Relocations in generic ELF (EM: 3)
+ .libs/libthatlibwm_default.a.tmp/default.o: could not read symbols: File in wrong format
+ make[4]: *** [libthatlibwm_default.o] Error 1
+
+# Proprietary Linux Modules Are Everywhere
+
+<hr/>
+ We did find one .ko file that was already included in the package, but
+ wasn't built when we ran "./build.sh". This is
+ path/path/android_X.X/device/device-type/mydevice.ko , which notes that
+ its license is "GPL v2" in the modinfo, but for which we could find no
+ source code in the source release. Please ensure that the source code
+ for mydevice.ko is included in the next source candidate.
+
+# Proprietary Linux Modules Are Everywhere
+
+<hr/>
+
+ * The following files are derivative of the kernel named Linux and
+ therefore covered by the GPL. However, no source code, scripts to
+ control compilation nor installation are included in your CCS
+ candidate:
+ lib/modules/myfilesystem.ko
+ lib/modules/mydevicecontroller.ko
+ lib/modules/myblockdevice.ko
+ lib/modules/mypcicard.ko
+
+# Non-Technical GPL Compliance Issues
+
+<hr/>
+ Regarding over the air updates: we'd like to see a screenshot or other
+ details documenting what has now been implemented by BestBuy to make
+ sure the offer for source appears to users appropriately after
+ upgrade. There was a consensus reached on the last conference call
+ how this would be done, so we only need follow up and implementation
+ on that.
+
+
+# Binary Comparison.
+
+<hr/>
+
+ Note that we did not receive a firmware image to compare this with
+ (though we do have the device). Company's website did not appear to
+ have any firmware images available for download. It would be helpful to
+ have such an image for the next CCS check.
+
+ The above source candidate was downloaded from
+ http:///sourcez.company.com/en/search/index.htm?keywords=X1234Y, which
+ was alluded to in Company's 2017-01-18 email to us that said:
+
+ "You can check this website
+ http://sourcez.company.com/en/search/index.htm "
+
+ The email did not mention how to use that website, but we found that by
+ entering "X1234Y" into the top right search box that we could find the
+ source file list.
+
+ Note that the offer for source included in the web UI of the device said
+ to email NAME@COMPANY.com , which is how the above instructions for
+ downloading the source were received.
+
+
+
+
+# More Info / Talk License
+
+<img align="right" src="cc-by-sa-4-0_88x31.png" />
+
++ URLs / Social Networking / Email:
+ - Pls. support Conservancy: [sfconservancy.org/supporter/](https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/)
+ - If you hold copyrights in Linux, Debian, Samba, or BusyBox, you can
+ join our enforcement coalition. [Contact us!](https://sfconservancy.org/linux-compliance/about.html)
+ - [*The Guide*](https://copyleft.org/guide) is available & [welcomes contributions at copyleft.org](https://copyleft.org).
+ - Conservancy: [sfconservancy.org](https://sfconservancy.org/) & [@conservancy](https://twitter.com/conservancy/).
+ - Me: [faif.us](http://faif.us) & [ebb.org/bkuhn](http://ebb.org/bkuhn)
+ - Slides: [ebb.org/bkuhn/talks](http://ebb.org/bkuhn/talks/ELC-2015/pristine-example.html).
+
+<span class="fitonslide">
+<p>Presentation and slides are: Copyright © Bradley M. Kuhn (2008–2011, 2015, 2017), Karen M. Sandler (2017), and are licensed under the <a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode">Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International License</a>. </p>
+</span>