BMW Australia Refusing to Comply with Terms of GNU Public License - jordigh
https://gist.github.com/duncan-bayne/fc3213d4a0eabb70bb1e
======
zmmmmm
To me this doesn't really look like a clear cut case. Does he own one of these
cars? If not, then I think it is very dubious whether he has any standing to
request the source code. If he _does_ then included with the car should be an
offer for how to access the GPL source code. He should have followed that (or
clearly stated that he could not locate it in his email). The requirement for
him to enter the VIN to access the source code does not seem unreasonable
since they are only required to distribute source code to customers, and he
has simply emailed them out of the blue asking them to give him the source
without any proof that he's a customer. The statement about BMW being the
"sole owner" is probably concerning proprietary parts of the software that may
not be subject to GPL at all. It is probably way beyond the skills of some
random customer service rep to distinguish the subtleties of those kind of
things.

This kind of interaction actually looks to me to be _counter_ to the spirit
under which the Free Software Foundation tries to administer the GPL - which
is that they work cooperatively to help companies comply rather than try to
trick them into legal hot water. I agree with the FSF approach and I don't
think this sort of PR ambush type tactic is helpful in promoting the use of
free software.

~~~
tzs
> To me this doesn't really look like a clear cut case. Does he own one of
> these cars? If not, then I think it is very dubious whether he has any
> standing to request the source code.

(All section references below are to GPLv2, since that is what the Linux
kernel uses)

Section 3 governs distribution of object or executable code. Section 3 gives
these requirements:

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,

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; or,

c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to
distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for
noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code
or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

BMW is distributing commercially and they did not receive the program in
object or executable form, so option "c" is out.

They are not distributing the source code with their cars, so option "a" is
out.

That leaves option "b", which requires them to give the code to _any third
party_ that requests it, at no more than their cost of performing a source
distribution.

~~~
mrb
_" They are not distributing the source code with their cars, so option "a" is
out"_

I disagree. BMW currently offers the source code as a download on their
website if a customer provides his 7-digit VIN, so this is them fulfilling the
requirement that they must "accompany [the car] with the complete
corresponding machine-readable source code". It is all in the meaning of
"accompany it": giving the source code physically along with the keys when you
purchase the car, or offering a source code download link. I would argue that
either option is compliant with the GPL, so to me it seems BMW is in the
right.

Edit: s/IBM/BMW/

~~~
0xffff2
(I think you meant BMW, not IBM...)

~~~
5ilv3r
BMW VIN must be longer than 7 digits.... IBM product license serial numbers at
7 digits would make more sense.

~~~
sjwright
BMW only ever cares about the last 7 digits of your VIN, as demonstrated on
their iDrive software update page:

[http://www.bmw.com/update](http://www.bmw.com/update)

(an example code would be "J123456")

------
SyneRyder
Google could have helped here:

BMW Car IT: Open Source [http://www.bmw-carit.com/open-
source/](http://www.bmw-carit.com/open-source/)

I'll take a guess based on the filename "ConnStarter" in the BMW firmware that
ConnMann is the primary GPL'd software. As the BMW site says: "The ConnMan
project provides a daemon for managing internet connections within embedded
devices running the Linux operating system.... ConnMan is available under the
terms of the GPL v2."

[http://www.bmw-carit.com/open-source/connman.php](http://www.bmw-
carit.com/open-source/connman.php)

You can download the source if you like.

~~~
jmiserez
The linked site may be useful, but where on that site did you find a download
link for the specific software version (including modifications) used? All I
see is a generic link to ConnMan's project website. I don't think that
suffices?

~~~
SyneRyder
I think BMW would argue that contributing their modifications directly to the
ConnMan Git repository for others to use would suffice. You can find a list of
BMW's commits to the ConnMan project here (Daniel Wagner seems to be the main
developer from BMW Car IT working on it):

[http://git.kernel.org/cgit/network/connman/connman.git/log/?...](http://git.kernel.org/cgit/network/connman/connman.git/log/?qt=author&q=bmw)

~~~
DannyBee
BMW would be wrong to argue that. They are required to provide corresponding
source code, which means the exact version they put in the cars, with any
patch files and build scripts needed to build it.

They can't just link to the general project site

~~~
gknoy
In the era of distributed source control, it seems reasonable to me if
"provide" meant, "link to a repo with our changes". I can see why that's not
in the letter of the GPL (e.g., what if github ceases to exist ten years from
now, and you want to tinker on your car), but for now it seems reasonable.

~~~
jordigh
It is in fact in the letter of the GPL:

[https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-
faq.html#SourceInCVS](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#SourceInCVS)

The actual relevant text of GPLv3 is in section 6d:

        d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated
        place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the
        Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no
        further charge.  You need not require recipients to copy the
        Corresponding Source along with the object code.  If the place to
        copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source
        may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party)
        that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain
        clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the
        Corresponding Source.  Regardless of what server hosts the
        Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is
        available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.

In GPLv2, this reads a bit differently:

        If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering
        access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent
        access to copy the source code from the same place counts as
        distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not
        compelled to copy the source along with the object code.

GPLv3 here seems a bit clearer to me. This in fact is one of the better
reasons for GPLv3. It gives more modern options for distributing source code,
since internet distribution became a lot more popular by the time GPLv3 was
written.

~~~
SyneRyder
The code is licensed under GPL 2, but I agree the GPL 3 is actually much
clearer & seems to suggest they're in compliance. (At least in respect to
ConnMan.)

Either way, if people are genuinely concerned and want a specific version of
the source code for their car, it seems Daniel Wagner is a contact at BMW to
ask. There's an email address in the git repository commits.

------
dmm
What GPL licensed software are they actually infringing upon? The linked
post[1] says they found mentions of systemd, but does the firmware actually
contain a linux kernel? I don't see anything that looks like a kernel in the
file listing.

Also if the firmware is properly signed delivering it over http shouldn't
matter, right?

[1] [https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-
softw...](https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-software-
updates-une=ncrypted/)

~~~
noselasd
The specific update here is just a delta update, and doesn't contain the
entire firmware. But it does contain shared libraries built for running on a
linux system, so it stands to reason there's linux kernel running somewhere
there.

(On that note - have someone sent a similar request to Tesla - they've at
least semi-officially said they're running Linux)

~~~
cynix
> (On that note - have someone sent a similar request to Tesla - they've at
> least semi-officially said they're running Linux)

Yes, people have sent requests to Tesla, and they continue to ignore these
requests to this day. See
[http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/archive/index.php/t-10748.htm...](http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/archive/index.php/t-10748.html)

------
genericacct
Frankly: given recent news (hacked jeeps, software used to cheat on emission
tests) I think it is time to _require_ _all_ software used on vehicles that
transit on public roads to be open sourced and available to the public. (for
independent testing and verification in the name of public safety)

~~~
lucb1e
Vehicles aren't the only things running software that might need verifying.
Far from it. While I wholeheartedly agree that it would be an amazing step, I
also fear the huge backlash from the car and IT industry. Doing this more
gradual probably works better, perhaps requiring open source (I'm not talking
freedom of modification or redistributing or anything yet, just viewing source
code) for software older than x years (like the patent model a bit, 20 years
or so).

Of course Windows 10 wouldn't have to be open source just because Windows is
older than 20 years, but Windows 95 would be.

Anyway, that is just one of the many possible ways. I just think we should be
weary of people stuck in the old ways and not limit the move to just cars.

~~~
cyphar
> Doing this more gradual probably works better, perhaps requiring open source
> (I'm not talking freedom of modification or redistributing or anything yet,
> just viewing source code) for software older than x years (like the patent
> model a bit, 20 years or so).

In that case, the car software is still proprietary software so you've gained
very little from making the source code public. If a vulnerability is found,
you can't write a patch for it and you have to wait for BMW to "get around to
you". Car software should be free software _upfront_.

~~~
lucb1e
> Car software should be free software upfront.

Yes! Just like medical implants (and the server-side counterparts that control
them), and my password manager, and actually any software that is in between
me and my password manager (OS, drivers, perhaps a browser), and private stuff
like my email client/server, and instant messaging client/server, and things
that track my vitals like those smart watch-like wristbands, and any non-
domestically developed software the government uses, etc.

Except few people aside from a few "open source radicals" will think like
that. For every person I know who will fully support this motion, I know five
who will object and another one or two who aren't really sure, and I already
have a biased social circle because I do believe in this cause.

As it stands, we never get to peek under the hood. A system like this would at
least make people aware that "gosh, if we implement this cheating now (or
whatever), we have to make sure to cover it up before we have to go public
with it. Better document extensively where it's implemented so we can remove
it thoroughly". Which is a bigger step than just one manager going "do it".
And we would be able to see trends over the past years and reflect necessary
changes in new policy. Perhaps two decades too late by then, but as it stands,
we have naught.

Then once people get used to the idea that in 20 years, when the software is
commercially useless anyway, perhaps we can open source it sooner. Or more
companies will go "look at us, we publish after 5 years for transparency
without loosing our cutting edge!" A bit of wishful thinking perhaps, but I'm
sure some will, and everyone would be forced after a certain time anyway.

But once again, this is just one way of doing it. There are almost certainly
better ways I didn't think of yet. We should just be thinking about it in the
first place.

------
OJFord
It seems to me less like refusal to comply with the terms of GPL, and more
like denial that they use GPLed code.

        > I have confirmed with our technical department who
        > advised that ... the usage rights agreement states that
        > the software is protected by copyright and BMW is the
        > sole owner... it is not subject to the requirements of a
        > "Public" licence

That may or may not be the case, but to me that doesn't say "yeah we use, na
you can't have it".

------
strictnein
I'm confused here. Where is the evidence that they've modified GPL'd software,
which they are then distributing, and are refusing to distribute the source
code for their modifications?

~~~
nailer
> Where is the evidence that they've modified GPL'd software

There's a Linux kernel and systemd in the 'i3'. See the links in the first few
sentences of the article.

> which they are then distributing

BMW is a Bayerische Motor Work, a car company that distributes cars

> and are refusing to distribute the source code for their modifications?

The letters from BMW to the people asking for a copy of the source, stating
they are refusing to distribute the source code for their modifications,
linked to in the article.

~~~
strictnein
I read that, but isn't this is the lowest type of "violation" there is? People
are just wanting them to host the source code that is already available in
about a billion locations then?

My question still stands, is there evidence that they're modifying GPL'd code
and then not distributing that code?

~~~
thom_nic
I think if they're running unmodified code, they could just say "we are
running X version Y with no modifications" and link to the upstream and be
done with it. Which could be the case.

Or they _have_ modified it and are refusing to release the source with their
modifications. But they haven't stated the former.

~~~
daemin
Technically they don't need to give you the code unless you own that model of
car. There's no requirement in the GPL that the code has to be shared to the
whole world/everyone. It only needs to be provided to the person that has
bought the vehicle which includes said software in compiled form.

~~~
yaur
This is not correct. They need to provide the offer for source to anyone they
provide the binaries to (e.g. customers) but the offer has to be valid for
anyone that gets a hold of it[1].

[1][http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-
faq.en.html#WhatDoesWrittenO...](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-
faq.en.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid)

~~~
daemin
I think I didn't expand my comment enough. In this context (of software
running a car), the manufacturer needs to provide a way of getting the GPL'd
source code to anyone that owns a vehicle with the relevant binary running in
the car.

Basically you don't lose your GPL software right if you've bought the car from
someone else other than the manufacturer.

------
rattray
Worth noting that the BMW people in the thread are in customer support, not
legal.

~~~
SyneRyder
Looking through the user's Github account, they have a history of contacting
customer support representatives of companies and threatening to post the
transcripts to Hacker News if their specific legal concerns are not addressed:

[https://gist.github.com/duncan-
bayne/74d6e38c506000982237](https://gist.github.com/duncan-
bayne/74d6e38c506000982237)

~~~
pjc50
How else can one get in touch with a megacorp?

~~~
spiznnx
I would assume the legal department would generally read and respond to
letters on legitimate concerns, even at a megacorp.

~~~
nevinera
Generally speaking, they will _definitely_ read them (and occasionally take
action), but only respond if they have some legal obligation to do so. Any
reply they make to an inquiry or accusation of this type can be used against
them, but a lack of response cannot (unless that lack of response violates
some requirement of the law).

~~~
anonbanker
This is why it's good to have a bilateral contract with them prior to your
contact, so that they have a legal obligation to reply. When they dont reply
to your offer of renegotiation or relief, you're safe to use their silence as
acquiescence or dishonor, depending on circumstance.

------
greydius
Please correct me if I'm wrong. I thought the GPL only required providing the
source code to the purchasers of the product. (Who can then redestribute it if
they'd like.) I didn't think it meant that if you use GPL code in your
product, then you are obligated to make your code available to everyone.

~~~
voxic11
You are required to distribute the source code to anyone you distribute
binaries to. So if for instance their binaries were available to the public
then they would also have to make their source code available to the public.
It seems in this case they released a patch to their software and made the
patch available to the public.

~~~
13of40
If I sell a computer with Linux on it, and I bundle on my own application
that's compiled to run on Linux, am I required to make the source code for
that application available?

In this case, if they just have an unmodified copy of Linux to provide the
run-time environment for their nav system or whatever, and the nav system
itself is an application on top of it, I don't know if it follows that they
need to release the source for their nav system.

~~~
icebraining
If it's an application, no, but if it's a kernel module (e.g. drivers to talk
to their devices), then yes. They still have to offer a copy of the kernel
source, even if they haven't modified it.

~~~
amscanne
>If it's an application, no, but if it's a kernel module (e.g. drivers to talk
to their devices), then yes.

There is debate about this, but there are certainly cases of compliant non-GPL
modules. It doesn't strictly follow. (Consider Ndiswrapper, for example.)

> They still have to offer a copy of the kernel source, even if they haven't
> modified it.

I don't really think the license implies technical minutae like this. The
source must simply be made available "on a medium customarily used for
software interchange". Whether you point to a tag on kernel.org or host it own
your own web servers (both cases including the Kconfig) is irrelevant.

~~~
icebraining
_There is debate about this, but there are certainly cases of compliant non-
GPL modules. It doesn 't strictly follow. (Consider Ndiswrapper, for
example.)_

Ndiswrapper is GPL-licensed. The resulting modules are probably not, but they
are usually not distributed anyway.

 _I don 't really think the license implies technical minutae like this. The
source must simply be made available "on a medium customarily used for
software interchange". Whether you point to a tag on kernel.org or host it own
your own web servers (both cases including the Kconfig) is irrelevant._

Sure, but have they pointed?

~~~
amscanne
> Ndiswrapper is GPL-licensed. The resulting modules are probably not, but
> they are usually not distributed anyway.

I was referring to modules wrapped by ndiswrapper. Of course they are
distributed.

There are other examples as well: nvidia being a salient one.

------
jwildeboer
History has proven over and over again that this kind of public shame and
blame approach doesn't help in any way, quite the opposite.

Hand this over to the Free Software Conservancy or the SFLC. And that should
have been the first step.

Now that the bridges are burning, BMW will be far less open to civil
discussion and cooperative solutions. Well done. #sarcasm

~~~
lucb1e
History has proven over and over again that naming and shaming works miracles.
Companies that turned a blind eye and were completely unreachable suddenly
turned active and kind just to save their reputation. Going to or even just
threatening to go to the media, I know from experience, is indeed productive.

I am really curious where you got the idea that it's counter productive.
Asking the conservancy to clean up this dirty work is expensive and takes
forever.

~~~
akamaka
The problem is when random people from the internet start unwarranted attacks
over GPL violations when the problem can be dealt with constructively.

The example that pops into my head is the time when some kid start working on
a mod to the Quake 3D engine that was possibly in violation of a free software
license. Instead of just reporting it to the copyright holder (id Software),
they engaged in a campaign of harassment until John Carmack himself came out
and told them to stop. It was some seriously shameful shit.

Public shaming should be one of the last steps to take. Maybe before starting
a lawsuit, or maybe after, that's up for debate, but certainly after other
avenues have been exhausted.

~~~
lucb1e
I see your point but would say there is a difference between a kid and a
multinational. The same law rules both but an individual doing this by
accident vs. a company doing it due to ignorance (in the best case) is
different. The multinational has enough money to defend itself in court, any
individual is bound to have less, especially a kid (in your example).

~~~
FireBeyond
What does this person realistically expect to gain by contacting Tier 1
customer service about an issue with -the source code and licensing of an in
car entertainment computer-?

Now in theory, CS should be "empowered" or able to escalate, but this is
juvenile, to me, the very briefest of exchanges and then off to HN and
elsewhere with "time for a lawsuit!".

------
fauria
Harald Welte founded gpl-violations ([http://gpl-
violations.org/about/](http://gpl-violations.org/about/)) 12 years ago. The
have been offline for some time, but it looks like they plan to continue with
their activities this year: "Actual GPL enforcement activity is expected to
resume at some point in 2016." Maybe they can help sorting this out.

------
antocv
Has anyone ever seen GPL being encorced in any country?

Wont this end with BWM uploading a tar.gz of a kernel found on kernel.org and
call it a good working day?

Have seen it happen too many times, and in most countries the user has no
claim on the license/copyright.

So unless I contributed/own some copyright found in exact Linux kernel
version/other software used by a distributor, and buy their stuff, there is
zilch I can do.

Which also means, you are free to sell/and break GPL software/license and as
long as you dont upset somebody who owns the copyright to it, you're good to
go.

~~~
luso_brazilian
Yes, and actually on BMW home country, Germany. The summary can be read at
this old Slashdot submission [1] from 2005 but the gist of it is that

 _> Harald Welte of the netfilter/iptables core team sought to enjoin Sitecom
from distributing its WL-122 router, which used netfilter's GPL'd code,
without also providing the source code and a copy of the GPL, as that license
requires _

and

 _> The Munich Court granted Welte a preliminary injunction [2] and then
upheld that injunction [3][4] _

I believe there are other instances of GPL being upheld in courts around the
world and this one should be only one of many examples.

GPL is not even necessary in these cases, in the absence of the (GP) license
it reverts to the default copyright rules, with all rights of copy and
distribution being at the hands of the copyright holders (save for Fair use
and other exceptions).

A company that would try to argue that GPL is not a valid license in court
would actually be admitting in court that they are distributing the software
without a license from the copyright holders all along.

[1] Munich Court Again Enforces GPL:
[http://news.slashdot.org/story/05/04/14/2024258/munich-
court...](http://news.slashdot.org/story/05/04/14/2024258/munich-court-again-
enforces-gpl)

[2] Preliminary injunction:
[http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/15/1649250&tid=...](http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/15/1649250&tid=123)

[3] Injunction upheld:
[http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/23/1558219&tid=...](http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/23/1558219&tid=117)

[4] Court's decision in English (pdf):
[http://www.jbb.de/judgment_dc_munich_gpl.pdf](http://www.jbb.de/judgment_dc_munich_gpl.pdf)

~~~
darkr
Yup, I can remember several companies settling and being forced to comply for
violations of busybox GPL'd code in the US off the top of my head - Verizon,
Extreme Networks and Xterasys. There are likely quite a few other examples of
GPL being successfully enforced.

------
y04nn
At least their update binaries are unencrypted, which allow us to see what
they are using. If some of you want to have a look: The article:
[https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-
softw...](https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/02/bmw-are-sending-their-software-
updates-unencrypted/)

Direct link to the binary:
[http://www.bmw.com/_common/shared/owners/bluetooth/bin/UPD07...](http://www.bmw.com/_common/shared/owners/bluetooth/bin/UPD07012.bin)

------
rewqfdsa
Good. I'm sick of people walking over copyleft licenses generally. It's only
because of copyleft that there exists a pro-sharing social norm in the
software development community. If you kick down the GPL, the norm will shift
back toward proprietary software everywhere. You, young developer, have no
idea just how shitty a world that is.

------
sargun
Tesla still continues to violate the GPL as well -
[https://forums.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/gpl-
sources](https://forums.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/gpl-sources).

------
stusmall
I've gotten the same response from a company when requesting kernel source
before. What is the best source for help in dealing this? I reached out to GNU
but got no response. I know the kernel isn't their project but didn't know
where else to turn.

------
_Codemonkeyism
Poor customer support agent.

------
sudhirj
Is it a violation if they don't modify Linux itself? So if I make a device
that runs Linux and my application binary, am I required to make my
application code public?

~~~
lucb1e
In that case, it shouldn't be a problem to point to Linux' code repository
right?

~~~
ocschwar
And it won't be. But cut their public relations staff some slack. They can't
tell Richard Stallman from Gregory Rasputin, and before saying or doing
anything they're going to be bringing themselves up to speed on what the GPL
is. No need to get rage-y just yet.

~~~
lucb1e
It's their obligation to forward what they don't understand. If I work for a
mobile network carrier and say something that indicates we don't follow some
privacy law, it's my fault for not asking my boss how we handle certain
things. (And my boss might ask his/hers, etc.)

Edit: I didn't downvote you, by the way.

------
kazinator
Misleading title; it looks more like they in fact refuse to acknowledge at all
that some of the code is someone else's.

> _Part of the usage rights agreement states that the software is protected by
> copyright and BMW is the sole owner. So in this case it is not subject to
> the requirements of a "Public" licence [sic]_

I.e. "This is all our software; there is no third-party GPL stuff in it, so we
need not comply with any such license."

------
castis
What is the worst-case scenario for an entity that refuses to comply?

~~~
Kiro
Probably not much and that's why I don't put any licenses on my stuff.

~~~
umanwizard
So, you release code but don't let anyone use it? Because that's the legal
effect of not putting licenses on your stuff.

~~~
Kiro
Yep and I use code without license all the time. Show me one case where that
has ever caused a problem.

~~~
oldmanjay
The point isn't that it may cause you a problem. The point is that the license
is the structure by which people understand how they can use things, and the
lack of a license is generally taken as "don't touch this" by the larger
community. It's essentially opting out of the larger pool of contribution,
which is of course totally valid and your right.

~~~
umanwizard
It's not just how the community interprets it; it's the law.

------
famerr
So it is strange for me even if I understand GPL. Does it means all the
network routers running custom linux have to provide sources of entire
modification? I assume if we want companies to make use of linux on a wide
level, there should be the ways to overcome this problem(if exists).

~~~
st3v3r
What's the problem?

~~~
famerr
First is security, if current asset based on linux is vulnerable and you make
it public consequences are obvious. Or even your system is vulnerable itself
because of modifications. Or 0day that will reveal afterwards. And your
product is based on embedded systems. I understand it's your choice, but it
holds the development.

Second is competitive advantage. If you have to release modified system, that
you use in your product on day 0, when you started, it interfere your
business. Again it's your choice, but it could hold the development. So
reasonable alternative would be good.

~~~
cyphar
If you choose to use code that is under the GPL or similar copyleft licenses,
then you have to play by the rules and provide people you distribute your
software to a way to get the source code.

~~~
famerr
Yes, I understand

------
outworlder
This is ridiculous. So now, any John Doe can contact customer support of any
company, then publicly shame them for not getting the response they want?
Aren't there organizations with the sole purpose of investigating Free
Software license violations, with access to actual lawyers? Where's the email
thread of such correspondence?

This sounds like a child crying mommy. Oh, and while I usually approve
attempts at breaking the way-too-serious corporate speak, smileys seem to
detract from the gravity of the issue being discussed.

Can we get responsible people to handle this, please? Like the Free Software
Foundation? Not a flash mob on the internet. This is counter-productive.

------
goerz
It seems to me that they're not distributing any software (i.e., the product
is a car, not software), which means licensing doesn't come into play. It
would be akin to someone finding out that I'm _privately_ using (and maybe
modifying) GPL software, and then demand that I make the source code available
to them. Only in GPLv3, the issue of selling a product that uses GPL software
internally is addressed. The situation changes of course once they make the
software itself accessible to third parties, in which case they'd also have to
supply the source code.

~~~
ceejayoz
If that were the case, you could get around the GPL by claiming to sell CDs,
thumbdrives, or zip files. Including software in your hardware product is
undeniably distributing that software, IMO.

~~~
goerz
I disagree. If you sell me a CD with software on it, I have the software. If
you sell me a car that runs a software internally, I have a car, but not the
software. The car, unlike the CD, is not a container for the software. In
fact, there is no trivial or intended way to get the software out of the car.
As I said, GPLv3 addresses this explicitly, but with GPLv2 the license just
doesn't apply. Then again, lots of people strongly dislike GPLv3, possibly
exactly for this reason.

~~~
goerz
Incidentally, if you send me a USB stick with some GPL software on it, I can
demand that you give me the source code of that software. However, I can _not_
demand that you also give me the source code for the _firmware_ of the USB
stick, even if the source code for that firmware is under GPL (v2)

~~~
cyphar
I would definitely demand the firmware if it is GPL. Just because it is
"firmware" doesn't suddenly not make it software that you've given me.

~~~
goerz
I can't fathom a reading of the GPLv2 that would support your position. It's
just not in there (it is, in GPLv3).

------
duncan_bayne
Duncan here. I'm the one who contacted BMW to ask about source code
availability. I don't own one of the BMWs in question, but the chap who wrote
the original article investigating the update contents did.

I've since been contacted by someone clueful from BMW Germany, and have put
him in touch with the car owner. They are working together to determine what
needs to be done for BMW to be compliant.

tl;dr: It looks like it's all going to be sorted out amicably.

------
yeukhon
This topic is getting dull every time on HN. Someone has to argue about GPL,
free software vs proprietary software.

------
jolux
pretty sure it's this:
[http://www.magnetimarelli.com/excellence/technological-
excel...](http://www.magnetimarelli.com/excellence/technological-
excellences/open-source-platform-genivi-compliant)

can't find the source for it though.


Siloxanes are chemically stable compounds used in many consumer and industrial products, ranging from cosmetics to adhesives. Siloxanes can enhance product flow capability, texture, adhesion, uniformity, and flavor. In consumer products, they are used as a volatile dispersant agent for other organic chemical additives. Siloxanes are also used in many different manufacturing processes, such as the production of silicon based semiconductors.
Siloxanes are saturated silicon-oxygen hydrides formed from atoms of carbon (C), Hydrogen (H), Oxygen (O) and Silicon (Si), and which include at least one chain of alternating silicon and oxygen atoms (—Si—O—Si—). Most siloxanes volatilize rapidly during anaerobic digestion, and also in many manufacturing processes. Common siloxanes are known as volatile methyl siloxanes (VMS), which can be linear molecule or rings structures (cyclomethicones). In cyclical VMS, each Si atom has two methyl-groups (CH3) attached to it. Some of the more common siloxanes include the linear hexamethyldisiloxane (“MM”) and octamethyltrisiloxane (“MDM”). Some of the more common cyclical siloxanes are hexamethylcycloclotrisiloxane (referred to as “D3”), octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (referred to as “D4”) decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (referred to as “D5”), and dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane (referred to as “D6”). “D” is used to represent the repeated dimethyl-silicon-oxygen group in a ring structure and is followed by either an ordinal or a subscript indicating the number of D groups that are present.
Although siloxanes are stable and non toxic, their presence in a gas stream is often undesirable. When present in a fuel gas, such as methane rich gas from a landfill or a digester, siloxanes will be carried throughout the process/treatment facility as a constituent of the methane gas, and under certain temperature and pressure conditions, the siloxanes will cause undesirable silica deposits to form in process-related equipment. For example, siloxanes are known to be present in trace amounts in biogas produced in Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTP) and landfills. Such biogas is often used as an alternate fuel to run engines that power equipment or produce electrical power. When the biogas is burned as a fuel, the siloxanes cause silica deposits to form in the engines, and such deposits can significantly increase maintenance costs. The silica deposits form on hot engine components, such as cylinder heads. Abrasive silica particles can also become entrained in the engine oil, increasing wear on bearings. The result of silica being introduced into internal combustion engines is a significant increase in engine wear, causing more frequent engine rebuilding and concomitant downtime.
In electrical power generation employing emission catalysts, siloxanes can form a silica film on the catalyst surface, rapidly and significantly reducing the catalyst's activity. This form of damage (or “poisoning”) is irreversible, meaning that the catalysts, which are often quite costly, must be replaced.
Siloxanes can also be unintentionally introduced in an industrial process. For example, siloxanes are formed during electronic semiconductor fabrication processes, and can contaminate process gas streams (such as silane) used in the production process. The presence of such siloxanes can lead to an increase in the rejection rate of silicon wafers. In industrial emission control processes, silica deposits (as noted above) can foul solvent recovery equipment and thermal oxidation equipment.
Siloxanes are also often present in gas distribution environments, where methane and/or natural gas is compressed and injected into pipelines for distribution. Siloxanes are sometimes added to compressor oils to increase lubricity and to the pipelines themselves during pigging operations. When the siloxane contaminated gas is combusted as a fuel (such as for heat), silica deposits foul the combustion equipment in a manner similar to the fouling of internal combustion engines described above.
Siloxanes have been found to cause problems such as those noted above when present in concentrations as low as 50 ppbv (parts per billion by volume), which is at or near the state-of-the-art detection limit for most siloxanes. Siloxanes are damaging at such low levels because the negative impact of silica deposition is cumulative. Homogeneous activated carbon filters have been successfully employed to remove some siloxanes; however, the performance of such filters in removing siloxanes from a gas stream is inadequate, clearly leaving room for improvement. Accordingly, it would be desirable to provide a better method and apparatus to effectively remove siloxanes from a gas stream.
As noted above, biogas often includes one of more constituents that complicate the removal of siloxanes from the gas, or whose presence is also undesirable. For example, halogenated organic species (such as chlorinated solvents and chlorofluorocarbons) are also found in biogas. When these halogenated species are burned along with the methane in internal combustion engines, hydrochloric acid is formed, which causes increased corrosion of metal parts. Halogenated species are also poisons to emission catalysts used to control nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO). The presence of heavy organics (such as benzene, toluene, and xylene) in sufficiently high concentrations can adversely affect the removal of siloxanes and halogenated organics.
Clearly, it would be desirable to remove the chlorinated organics, and heavy organics, as well as the siloxanes, from gas streams. One prior art approach uses activated carbon for this purpose. While activated carbon can effectively remove all three of the offending species, breakthrough of these species can occur rapidly, whereupon the media must be replaced. Moreover, the capacity for typical activated carbon comprising bituminous coal-based carbons, coconut shell carbons, or wood-based carbons is limited, requiring their frequent replacement. It would therefore be desirable to provide a more effective system and method for removing siloxanes, chlorinated organics, and heavy organics from gas streams.
In addition, landfill gas is often grossly contaminated with a number of undesirable volatile organic species at high concentrations, some of which render the removal of siloxanes using a carbon filtration media particularly problematical. Among the problematic volatile species often found in landfill gas are oxygenated organics. Oxygenated organics contain one or more oxygen atoms; and include acetates, alcohols, aldehydes, esters, ethers, formates, furals, furans, glycols, ketones, oxides, and other substances. Oxygenated organics can hamper the ability of adsorbent media to remove siloxanes due to several factors. First, oxygenated organics can function as solvents to strip siloxanes already picked up by an adsorbent. Very high concentrations of oxygenated organics can condense in adsorbent media beds and essentially flush siloxanes out of the adsorbent media bed. Second, heavier molecular weight oxygenated organics, such as acetates, can physically displace siloxanes already picked up or captured by adsorbent media, causing the siloxanes to be released back into the gas flow. Removal of siloxanes from a gas stream using a carbon based adsorbent in the presence of oxygenated organics is particularly challenging. It would therefore be desirable to provide a more effective system and method for removing siloxanes from gas streams in which oxygenated organics are present.


In the production of polyurethane foams, a polyol is reacted with a polyisocyanate in the presence of a polyurethane catalyst and a blowing agent. Unfortunately, certain blowing agents, namely chlorofluorocarbons (so-called "CFCs"), are hazardous to the environment, specifically the ozone layer of the stratosphere. Hence, alternatives to the use of CFC's are being actively sought by the polyurethanes community.
Certain alternatives to the use of CFC's in the preparation of flexible polyurethane foams are known in the art. By way of illustration, methylene chloride has been used in conjunction with water as blowing agents to produce the desired foam. Unfortunately, methylene chloride has been determined to be a volatile organic acid, and therefore it is not desireable for use as a blowing agent. Other alternatives to the use of CFC's that do not involve the use of volatile organics or carcinogens would be highly desired by the flexible urethanes community. In the past, CFC-free, so-called "all-water-blown" foams tend to scorch and/or be firmer than might otherwise be desired at relatively low densities. Heretofore, suitable alternatives have not been known based upon the knowledge of the present inventors.


LIVE BLOG: SBC Tourney/FAU vs. FIU, Take 2

And so it comes down to this: Four teams left, all with a loss: FIU, FAU, Troy and ASU. It's a true semifinal, starting with the Golden Panthers and the Owls. Starters: FAU -- Taylor Everist (2-7, 6.60 ERA); FIU -- R.J. Fondon (5-3, 3.93). First pitch is 1:47 p.m. If FIU wins, it will play in the title game Sunday at 11 a.m.


The Perfectly Normal Ways Trump Can Enrich Himself as President

Along with the many unprecedented problems they create, Donald Trump’s conflicts of interest, as with so many other things, illustrate in striking fashion an existing flaw in American democracy. The problem is corruption: the potential for elected officials to take actions that benefit themselves, their family, their friends, or their business associates rather than the country as a whole.

Donald Trump’s real-estate, licensing, and entertainment empire throws the problem into stark relief. Foreign leaders could give Trump’s businesses abroad sweetheart deals in order to curry favor with the leader of the free world. (The latest plan is for the Trump Organization to donate to the U.S. government “profits” from transactions with foreign states, but that’s only a minimal constraint.) Domestically, any number of government policies—the minimum wage, overtime rules, and so on—could be designed to benefit the Trump Organization.

Putting the Trump Organization in a trust is hardly even a fig leaf, since the beneficiary of the trust would most likely be the president’s children (or Trump himself), and he would still have an interest in doing favors for his family. Even if his company were placed in a blind trust, the president-elect would retain the knowledge he already has of his assets, and could see which assets were sold and which were still part of his holdings. Selling off the businesses now, even at fire-sale prices, would be a better solution. But it is naive to think that doing so would completely eradicate his conflicts of interest.

History shows that corruption rarely comes in black and white; it thrives on shades of gray. Did Halliburton get a multi-billion dollar, no-bid contract to operate Iraqi oil wells because it was the best deal the government could get, or because Vice President Dick Cheney wanted to help the company he had led for five years, and in which he still held stock options? Hank Paulson placed his assets in a blind trust when he became treasury secretary—but was that enough to make him truly disinterested in the fate of Goldman Sachs, the bank where he had worked for more than 30 years, during the financial crisis of 2008? Sophisticated investors even seem to expect that powerful officials will favor companies with which they have relationships: According to research by Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Amir Kermani, Todd Mitton, and me, financial institutions with connections to Tim Geithner enjoyed extraordinary stock-price gains when he was nominated to be treasury secretary in November 2008.

The potential to use public power to further private interests goes far beyond a president cutting a good deal for his own company. In fact, the single biggest thing Donald Trump could do to enrich his family is something that has nothing to do with his business interests: repealing the estate tax.

Though Trump has never disclosed his precise net worth—Forbes puts it at $3.7 billion—his family stands to lose 40 percent of it to the estate tax. Put another way, eliminating the tax would increase his family’s after-tax wealth by two-thirds—more than $1 billion, based on the estimate from Forbes. It’s hard to imagine anything the president-elect could do that would increase the value of his businesses by that much.

Trump will be able to boost his family’s wealth without the slightest hint of impropriety, because estate-tax repeal has been a Republican Party priority for years. But why is getting rid of a tax that affects only the richest 0.2 percent of families at the top of the Republican majority’s to-do list? Because, as the political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page have shown, our political system responds to the preferences of the very wealthy, not those of ordinary people.

Of course, proponents wouldn’t describe repealing the estate tax as a giveaway to the very rich. Instead, from President-elect Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan on down, they argue that, because it only affects money a person doesn’t use during his or her lifetime, the estate tax discourages savings, so repealing it will increase savings and investment, turbocharging economic growth. Economists who have surveyed the recent research, such as Eric Toder and Kim Rueben at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and Jane Gravelle and Donald Marples at the Congressional Research Service, however, find that the evidence for this theoretical proposition is flimsy at best. This type of naive or disingenuous belief that the world operates according to the dictates of Economics 101 serves to disguise the interests of wealthy politicians and their even wealthier donors as sound economic policy. (And estate-tax repeal is only the tip of the iceberg. According to research by the Tax Policy Center, eliminating the estate tax would cost $174 billion over the next 10 years; Trump’s proposed 15 percent tax on corporations and other businesses is worth $3.2 trillion.)

None of this is to say that wealthy individuals are incapable of pursuing economic policies that benefit the public good; indeed, many have, historically. But the opportunity for self-enrichment is real, and it requires leaders who are committed to differentiating between the public’s interests and those of their donors—or themselves.

It would be an important step toward resolving the president-elect’s conflicts of interest if he were to sell his businesses. But the prospect of a company owned by a sitting president is only the most naked manifestation of the “rigged” system against which Trump himself campaigned. Ultimately, the benefits the president-elect could extract for his own mid-sized company are dwarfed by the favors that the new administration can do for its core constituency of billionaires and multi-millionaires—including Trump himself.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.


Q:

In Java, What can I use to convert the string "27/Jun/1991" to a date or timestamp?

In Java, What can I use to convert the string "27/Jun/1991" to a date or timestamp?

A:

try this
SimpleDateFormat sdf = new SimpleDateFormat("dd/MMM/yyyy", Locale.ENGLISH);
Date date = sdf.parse("27/Jun/1991");
System.out.println(date);

output
Thu Jun 27 00:00:00 EEST 1991


ASN Injury Report

Terrence Boyd Has Setback, Josh Gatt Is Running Again

From Germany to England to Norway to the Netherlands, American Soccer Now's Nick Kariuki has the latest injury updates on key U.S. national team players—as well as a few on the fringes of the squad.

BY
Nick Kariuki
Posted
February 19, 2016
3:00 PM

SHARE THIS STORY

Terrence Boyd’s recovery has hit another setback, though Red Bull Leipzig suggested it’s more minor than October’s misfortune. The club tweeted on Thursday that Boyd had a cyst on his knee surgically removed, which would suspend his rehab by 10 days. The 25-year-old striker underwent a similar procedure in October, where his lateral meniscus was also smoothed to prevent further inflammation. This third surgery in 15 months appears to be less of a worry though. Boyd himself provided this quote for the club to further assuage worries:

Danny Williams missed Reading's scoreless draw against Burnley on Saturday due to a hamstring problem. This was the 26-year-old's first absence from the matchday squad all season. Royals manager Brian McDermott told the club the following Wednesday that Williams will still "be a tall order" to make the Royals' FA Cup match against West Brom tomorrow, since the defensive midfielder was scheduled to return to training today.

Tim Howard returned from his knee injury to make the bench for Everton’s 1-0 loss to West Brom. Howard will still be the backup for the club’s Saturday cup match at Bournemouth, after manager Roberto Martinez announced that Joel Robles would remain the first choice. “It's important that you give continuity and at the moment, Joel is doing really well,” Martinez said in a Thursday press conference. "But Tim Howard has been injured and he hasn't been able to fight for his place back. We'll benefit from the competition for places and that's the way I want to see it."

Without a cup match this weekend, Stoke City’s next fixture is eight days away. There’s already the expectation that Geoff Cameron will sit the game out due to his ankle injury. The Potters are spending five days in Dubai for warm weather training. Counterintuitive to the better weather, Cameron and other injured players have taken advantage of the training complex’s cold chambers. “There were three chambers set at minus-10, minus-20 and minus-107” degrees Celsius, Stoke Assistant Manager Mark Bowen told The Stoke Sentinel on Friday. “The injured lads like Geoff Cameron and Ryan Shawcross spent a minute in each because it's supposed to repair muscles quicker.”

Another week, another promising update on Aron Jóhannsson’s return to Werder Bremen’s side after the nerve irritation in his hip last year:

Johannsson even took this friendly dig at his fellow striker Anthony Ujah on Thursday. Hopefully he can bring that confidence to the pitch when the time comes.

Rubio Rubin spoke with FC Utrecht’s video channel Friday, saying that he hopes to return to training with the team in the next few weeks. An optimistic return for the side’s KNVB Cup semifinal against amateur side VVSB on March 2 was also mentioned. How did Rubin feel about that? We’ll let you decide:

Josh Gattis running again after his last anterior cruciate ligament operation five months ago. The Molde winger’s return in May 2015 only lasted five minutes, with knee injuries hampering him as far back as 2013.

San Jose Earthquakes boss Dominic Kinnear expects Fatai Alashe to return from his hernia surgery rehab within the month, the San Jose Mercury Newsreported on Wednesday. Alashe had to withdraw from the U.S. national team’s January camp and undergo a procedure to fix the injury in late January.

The same article reported that Marc Pelosi may need surgery to relieve the severe tendinitis in his knee, which could come with a potentially long recovery period. "It has just been bugging him," Kinnear said. "It has bothered him the whole offseason." Pelosi now seems certain to miss the U-23 national team’s Olympic playoff against Colombia in March.

Philadelphia Union captain Maurice Edu posted this on his Instagram account earlier this week, with emojis that can only be positive:


Biography

Active: July 7, 1498 - ; Vienna, Austria

The Wiener Sängerknaben or Vienna Boys' Choir (sometimes translated Vienna Choir Boys) is the world's foremost children's choral group. It is also among the oldest of all musical organizations, having been founded pursuant to an Imperial decree of Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I on July 7, 1498; the Emperor wished boys' voices to be added to the choir of the Imperial Chapel, or Hofkapelle. This established a tradition of having the boys sing inRead more weekly Sunday masses in the Imperial Chapel of the Hofburg Palace in Vienna, a tradition that continues today.

Over the centuries, illustrious composers have written masterpieces for the Boys' Choir of the Imperial Chapel, including Mozart, Bruckner, Gluck, and Schubert. Many great musicians got their start as members of the Boys' Choir; among them were the great conductors Hans Richter, Clemens Krauss, and Lovro von Matacic. During the days of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the choir became renowned for its secular performances as well, appearing in colorful Imperial-style military uniforms, each complete with a dagger. After World War I, wide popular and governmental disfavor of all things Imperial resulted in the dissolution of many long-standing institutions, including the Imperial Chapel Choir. However, Chaplain Joseph Schnitt remained in his position at the chapel and re-gathered the choir. Sparing no personal expense, he re-established a boarding school for the choristers. He replaced the imperial uniforms with a distinctive sailor-style uniform.

The Vienna Boys' Choir has the most stringent training and admittance policy in the world. Boys wishing to join must first gain entrance to a preparatory school where they receive a complete elementary education. Their instruction includes elements of musical theory, sight-singing, and the practice of singing, and instruction on at least one instrument; at the age of nine, they have to pass an examination based strictly on musical ability and vocal quality. There is no religious requirement. The teaching is purposely intensive in order that their education not be slighted due to the frequent touring. There are usually two choirs away on a tour at any given time, most frequently for three months. They are accompanied by their choirmaster, their tutor, and a nurse. Vienna Choir Boys have visited the United States well in excess of 50 times since 1932 and have traveled to all six inhabited continents. They are beloved the world over for their lively singing style and beautiful tone and have commissioned a number of new works, including Britten's The Golden Vanity. Read less

There are 127 Vienna Boys' Choir recordings available.

Select a specific Composer, Conductor or Label or browse recordings by Formats & Featured below

Formats & Featured

Biography

Active: July 7, 1498 - ; Vienna, Austria

The Wiener Sängerknaben or Vienna Boys' Choir (sometimes translated Vienna Choir Boys) is the world's foremost children's choral group. It is also among the oldest of all musical organizations, having been founded pursuant to an Imperial decree of Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I on July 7, 1498; the Emperor wished boys' voices to be added to the choir of the Imperial Chapel, or Hofkapelle. This established a tradition of having the boys sing inRead more weekly Sunday masses in the Imperial Chapel of the Hofburg Palace in Vienna, a tradition that continues today.

Over the centuries, illustrious composers have written masterpieces for the Boys' Choir of the Imperial Chapel, including Mozart, Bruckner, Gluck, and Schubert. Many great musicians got their start as members of the Boys' Choir; among them were the great conductors Hans Richter, Clemens Krauss, and Lovro von Matacic. During the days of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the choir became renowned for its secular performances as well, appearing in colorful Imperial-style military uniforms, each complete with a dagger. After World War I, wide popular and governmental disfavor of all things Imperial resulted in the dissolution of many long-standing institutions, including the Imperial Chapel Choir. However, Chaplain Joseph Schnitt remained in his position at the chapel and re-gathered the choir. Sparing no personal expense, he re-established a boarding school for the choristers. He replaced the imperial uniforms with a distinctive sailor-style uniform.

The Vienna Boys' Choir has the most stringent training and admittance policy in the world. Boys wishing to join must first gain entrance to a preparatory school where they receive a complete elementary education. Their instruction includes elements of musical theory, sight-singing, and the practice of singing, and instruction on at least one instrument; at the age of nine, they have to pass an examination based strictly on musical ability and vocal quality. There is no religious requirement. The teaching is purposely intensive in order that their education not be slighted due to the frequent touring. There are usually two choirs away on a tour at any given time, most frequently for three months. They are accompanied by their choirmaster, their tutor, and a nurse. Vienna Choir Boys have visited the United States well in excess of 50 times since 1932 and have traveled to all six inhabited continents. They are beloved the world over for their lively singing style and beautiful tone and have commissioned a number of new works, including Britten's The Golden Vanity. Read less

Sign up now for two weeks of free access to the world's best classical music collection. Keep listening for only $19.95/month - thousands of classical albums for the price of one! Learn more about ArkivMusic Streaming


Category Archives: Cloud Computing

Cyber-attacks are on the rise, and businesses are starting to feel the heat. The past few years have witnessed more cyber-attacks than any time in recent memory. The revenue lost to cyber crime increases every year, and vastly outstrips the …

Hosted desktops can help hospitals to reduce their IT costs, increase the security, manageability, and reliability of their IT, and allow their employees to access their work-related files and applications from anywhere with any device. Hosted desktops are Windows desktop …

Hiring temporary workers and contractors and incorporating business or project partners into your operations allows you to expand your workforce or bring in outside expertise while minimizing your personnel costs. It makes your organization more nimble, allowing you to add …

One of the main benefits of cloud computing is that it’s more reliable than traditional in-house, onsite IT—reliable meaning that it is more consistently available and experiences less downtime and data loss. This is mainly because cloud providers can afford …

By signing up for hosted desktops, colleges can decrease their IT costs and increase the manageability, accessibility, flexibility, and security of their IT. Hosted desktops are Windows desktop operating systems (usually Windows 7 or 8.1) that are installed and maintained …


Alea

Sleeping

With or without handle strips? With external or internal storage drawers? Or perhaps completely without a fascia, in the form of a walk-in wardrobe with matching equipment? This cupboard system allows you a complete freedom of choice.

Our furniture systems are available in selected matte and glossy paint colours and matte and glossy rear-lacquered glass. Special colours are available on request. Porous wood veneers complement the range.


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<LinearLayout xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
    android:layout_width="match_parent"
    android:layout_height="match_parent"
    android:orientation="vertical">

    <TextView
        android:id="@+id/profile_username_hint_tv"
        android:layout_width="wrap_content"
        android:layout_height="wrap_content"
        android:layout_margin="16dp"
        android:text="Username:" />

    <TextView
        android:id="@+id/profile_username_tv"
        android:layout_width="wrap_content"
        android:layout_height="wrap_content"
        android:layout_margin="16dp"
        android:textColor="@android:color/black" />
</LinearLayout>


In Cumaragues, Venezuela, an elderly father, Evaristo, and his pubescent children, Enrique (13) and Maria (16), survive by harvesting salt from the sea. After the father dies, they live alone. Isolated from the outside world they become increasingly distanced, whilst their lust starts to blossom. Their lives get a lot harder. The brutal reality of harvesting sea salt coincides with their blossoming sexuality. Their lives of solitude drive them further apart whilst awakening lust makes itself known.