+ORD Solutions thanks for the quick and correct response. It is an example for the other companies that (unknowingly) violate the GPL license.
As far as I can tell you corrected it as soon as someone pointed you to the license.
I know other companies do not do this and I have no time and energy to enforce the license.
Thanks for the correction.
+ORD Solutions thanks for the quick and correct response. It is an example for the other companies that (unknowingly) violate the GPL license.
As far as I can tell you corrected it as soon as someone pointed you to the license.
I know other companies do not do this and I have no time and energy to enforce the license.
Thanks for the correction.
@Jenn_Gibson_ORD_Solu thanks 
awesome and quick response.
@bob_cousins actually, Copyright is like rocket science. It’s just that rocket science isn’t that hard, when you know it that is. (I actually know a bit of rocket science, thanks to KerbalSpaceProgram) So same goes for copyright and GPL, it’s not that hard, but you have to know it. A friendly introduction is usually all it takes in 80% of the cases. No need to be an ass-mob because of an minority abusing GPL.
I’ve dealt with a bunch of these already (also on Cura/CuraEngine) and so has my co-worker software developer. And really, your attitude is not helping, not even a tiny bit.
@Daid_Braam FWIW, the GPL issue was brought up to them over a month ago in that support ticket. Their official response was silence for over 3 weeks, then stating that they would just re-write the firmware from scratch. (which would not have brought them into compliance since they had already shipped boards with marlin-derived firmware)
It wasn’t until the issue was posted on their Kickstarter (where it would impact their revenue stream) that they came into compliance (and quickly, too!).
That’s shady, in my eyes.
@ TimElmore: We have been having open discussions with most of our customers about this through our fresh desk ticket system. We were not sitting in silence to them. 
We are a small team and very busy. We addressed the issue and resolved it. The firmware has been posted, we have happy customers, and that is what we are aiming for!
@Daid_Braam Regardless of what transpired someone in that position should be well aware of the circumstances. They shouldn’t need a friendly reminder. This isn’t some kid hacking a one off project. It’s a funded venture that has a responsibility to know what they are using and how to use it. If one is into the code so deep as to be able to modify it for five extruders then reading and understanding the accompanying license terms shouldn’t be an issue.
Folks like Erik put a great deal of effort into their projects (just as you folks do with Cura and your machines) and don’t have the resources to address the issue other than when others shine a light on what is happening and the community polices the offenders. While it’s noble of you to come to their defense I think it’s naive to say this is just an innocent misunderstanding when under the terms of the license that code should have been made available once machines that used it were available to the public. I think that minimizing the impact or potential impact of a violation has the potential to do more damage than a few noisy open source advocates.
@dstevens_lv like they said, they are a small team. Which is kinda what I expected. As they put on their website that due to bigger demand then expected, they had to increase the lead-time. I expect they are in the same problem which Ultimaker was 2 years ago. Small team of max 10 people, way too much incoming requests.
And I fully disagree on your final statement. I think that those few noisy open-source advocates have a big impact on the policy of “new” companies like this. We want contributors, that’s the best possible thing you can get. A few people shouting as you “you are doing shit wrong! Fix Now!” does not really put you in the contribution mood. And will drive people away from OpenSource (Seen it happen)
I couldn’t care too much about ORD Solutions, I care about how the Open-Source people respond and act. Be an ass, and you can expect an ass-response. Be nice, and you might get a nice response. Or an ass-response, in which case you can always decide to respond as an ass, or with a lawyer.
Ultimaker has done shit wrong license wise. I have done shit wrong license wise. More so on my previous job. Hell, I’ve seen code with “Copyright Philips” above it, which was clearly a copy of parts of GPLv2 kernel code. People make mistakes. Companies make mistakes. And a bit of understanding goes a long way.
@Daid_Braam When someone uses GPL code and releases it to the public they are obligated to publish that code. Period. It doesn’t matter how big they are, how busy they are or anything else. To make matters worse in this instance they did nothing for a month, posted they wouldn’t release the code (since deleted) then posted some weak attempt to explain they were doing the users a favor by not posting the code with the leader blaming those to whom he delegated the authority.
Those of us that were around during the first Internet boom and the dawn of OSS/Free Software movement have a different perspective on the more vocal opponents being responsible for driving people out of open software. In that anyone that is serious about developing an open source solution usually isn’t swayed by them. Were that the case Stallman and Raymond would have driven everyone away back in the 90s and there would be no OSS movement. As we know, that didn’t happen in fact the exact opposite happened. At that time those that enthusiastically supported open source much in the same way some do here had much more influence and wider influence in their particular than most of those in open hardware today.
People that want to develop open source projects will keep doing so because they want to and won’t stop because some mean man on the Internet says about your licensing. If one is passionate about a project they aren’t going to care what Bob says about their licensing on Google+. Those that are concerned are free to license their work under other licenses or not at all. OTOH, pretending that the license terms are excused because someone is too small or too busy or doesn’t know creates an atmosphere where people find it better to ask forgiveness than permission and keep abusing it until they get called out in it. That alone is far more dangerous to open source.
I think we should close this thread.
ORD Sollutions responded and corrected the license.
I mailed pirate 3d 2 times about the firmware source code. They responded with “use google”.
The Bucky board seems to use marlin, But I can not find the source.
If someone has the time and energy ask them to release the source. But do not do it in a topic with ORD in the name.
@erik vdzalm @dstevens lv & everyone else who contributed:
Thank you. I understand everyone is allowed to have their own say, and this is an open board for discussion. Tim Elmore posted the link to here on our Kickstarter page, which is what brought me to join in on this conversation.
We did as we were required, and we apologized. We would like to move on now. If there are other companies that you have a problem with, then they need to be dealt with, but not while continuing to put us down.
Thank you everyone for allowing us to comment, and for your comments back. We have had meetings this week about this, and we are moving forward as an open source company and have agreed to do our best to let that be known. Our customers that wanted the firmware are now happy, and working with it. Those that didn’t care and didn’t want it, are happy submitting to us changes to be made. We are a small team of under 10 people, and yes we want to do well - of course we do!
We are learning as we go along. We all make different mistakes and we owned up to it. Thank you for helping us come to the right decision. We see how important it is to this community and we want to not only make our customers happy, but you as well.
Can we now close this thread and move on.
Jenn
ORD Solutions