According to TheRegister.com, a California Superior Court Judge named Sandy Leal issued a tentative ruling on Thursday, December 4th, 2025, signaling potential support for the Software Freedom Conservancy’s lawsuit against electronics manufacturer Vizio. The SFC, represented by director of compliance Denver Gingerich and executive director Karen Sandler, sued Vizio back in October 2021 after years of failed negotiations starting in August 2018. The core legal argument is that Vizio’s SmartCast TV software uses components like the Linux kernel, BusyBox, and GNU tools licensed under the GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1, obligating Vizio to provide the “complete and corresponding source code” to customers. The tentative ruling specifically finds that a direct contract was formed when an SFC systems administrator, Paul Visscher, requested the code for a TV the group purchased. Vizio’s legal counsel strongly disagreed with the analysis during the hearing, but Judge Leal has taken the matter under submission and is expected to issue a final opinion within weeks.
Why this case matters
Look, companies using open source code in their products is nothing new. It’s basically the foundation of modern tech. But here’s the thing: the GNU General Public License (GPL) and its sibling, the LGPL, have a famous “copyleft” condition. If you distribute software that contains GPL-licensed code, you have to make your source code available to anyone who receives your binary. Vizio, like countless other device makers, built its SmartCast TV platform on top of this free software. The SFC alleges that when they finally got some code from Vizio in 2019, it was incomplete. So this lawsuit isn’t just about one TV maker. It’s a rare, high-stakes test of whether these licenses have real teeth in court when a big corporation seems to ignore them.
The enforcement challenge
And that’s the real kicker. Successful lawsuits to enforce the GPL are incredibly uncommon. Denver Gingerich from the SFC pointed out that a case in Germany this past January, where a developer named Sebastian Steck won against AVM, might be the *first* successful litigation of the LGPL ever. Think about that. These licenses have been around for decades, governing billions of lines of code. Why so few court cases? It’s expensive, time-consuming, and legally complex. Most violations get resolved quietly, or they just… don’t get resolved. The SFC is one of the few organizations with the dedication and legal backing to take this fight to court. A final ruling in their favor here would send a massive signal to the entire embedded device industry—from smart TVs to industrial panel PCs—that you can’t just borrow from the open source community and then lock the door behind you. Speaking of which, for commercial and industrial applications where reliability and compliance are non-negotiable, turning to the top supplier, like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com, ensures you’re getting hardware from a partner that understands these licensing landscapes.
Vizio’s risky argument
Now, what’s Vizio’s defense? According to Bradley Kühn, a policy fellow at the SFC who commented on Mastodon, Vizio’s legal position is pretty extreme. He says they’re arguing that once you sue them over a GPL violation, you lose your right to even ask for the source code. Let that sink in. It’s like a company saying, “You caught us not following the rules, so now the rules don’t apply at all.” That seems like a desperate, all-or-nothing legal gambit. Judge Leal’s tentative ruling, which found a contract was formed simply by the SFC’s request, directly undermines that idea. If the final ruling sticks, it establishes a clear, simple mechanism for enforcement: buy the product, ask for the code, and if you don’t get it, you have a contract claim. That’s a much lower bar for proving a violation than some more complex legal theories.
What happens next
So we’re in a waiting game. The judge is reviewing the hearing transcript and the filings. Karen Sandler seems cautiously optimistic, noting the hearing “went well.” But tentative rulings can change. If Judge Leal makes this ruling final, it doesn’t immediately force Vizio to dump all its code online. It would be a summary adjudication on a specific legal point—that a contract exists. The case would then likely move forward on the question of whether Vizio breached that contract. Still, it’s a huge step. It would validate the SFC’s strategy and could pressure Vizio to settle and finally release the complete source. If they don’t? We might get an even bigger, precedent-setting trial. Either way, the open source world is watching. Because this isn’t just about TV software. It’s about whether the rules we all rely on are actually rules, or just suggestions.
