Referral sent 2026-08-19 to the Free Software Foundation, copying the Software Freedom Conservancy, after the source request of 2026-08-17 went unanswered. Published here in full, unedited, for the same reason the rest of this record is: so that nothing has to be taken on trust. ====================================================================== To: licensing@fsf.org Cc: compliance@sfconservancy.org Subject: GPLv3 source request unanswered - Genmitsu 3030-PROVer MAX firmware (SainSmart / Vastmind LLC) identifies itself as Grbl 1.1f ------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello, I am reporting an unanswered GPLv3 source request and asking for your advice on next steps. I am not a GRBL copyright holder and I am not asserting that I can enforce the licence. I am a recipient of the binary who asked for the Corresponding Source and has not received an answer. THE SITUATION IN ONE PARAGRAPH SainSmart (an operating name of Vastmind LLC) publishes firmware for the Genmitsu 3030-PROVer MAX as a public download. That firmware identifies itself, in its own startup banner and version strings, as "Grbl 1.1f", "Grbl for ARM32" and "GRBL Controller V2". GRBL is licensed GPLv3. The shipped image contains no licence notice, no copyright notice and no offer of source. I requested the Corresponding Source on 17 August 2026. As of the date of this email SainSmart has not provided source, has not said where source may be obtained, and has not stated a position on whether the GPLv3 applies. WHY THE REQUEST IS PROPERLY MADE The firmware is served to anyone, with no login, no account and no proof of purchase, from a public S3 URL that returns HTTP 200 to an unauthenticated request. Receiving the object code that way is what makes a person a recipient under the licence, so the request rests on GPLv3 section 6(d) and does not depend on machine ownership. I captured the full HTTP response headers as part of the record. WHAT THE BINARY CONTAINS, AND WHAT IT DOES NOT The file is firmware.bin, 119,796 bytes, from the published 3030_PROVerMAX_Firmware_V3.0 package. It contains GRBL's own identification strings and GRBL's status and error reporting protocol. Searching the entire image for licence text returns nothing: the terms gpl, gnu, general public, copyright, licens, free software and warranty each return zero matches. I want to be precise about the claim. What is verifiable is that the image CONTAINS no licence notice, no copyright notice and no offer of source. I am not claiming that anyone removed a notice, and the page I maintain says so explicitly. THE CORRESPONDENCE 17 Aug 2026 I sent a source request to support@sainsmart.com. 18 Aug 2026 SainSmart replied asking what purpose I needed the complete source code for, and for my 3030-PROVer MAX order information. They did not decline, and they did not address whether the GPLv3 applies. 18 Aug 2026 I replied noting that the licence conditions the obligation on neither a stated purpose nor a purchase, identified the file and its hashes precisely, and asked them either to say where the source can be obtained or to state in writing that the firmware is not a GRBL derivative. 19 Aug 2026 No further response. Record published publicly. The complete thread is reproduced verbatim, unedited, on the page below. EVERYTHING IS INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIABLE I have deliberately built the record so that nothing has to be taken on trust: - the published SHA256 hashes of the zip, the extracted firmware and the archive, together with SainSmart's own x-amz-meta-sha256 header value, which matches - verify.sh, a script that re-derives every hash claim with curl and sha256sum from the live URL - the captured HTTP response headers showing an unauthenticated 200 - the full string extraction (1,453 strings) and the licence-term search - headless Ghidra output: 430 recovered functions, including the settings printer that emits four axes by index - the verbatim email thread The public record is here: https://jmscnc.com/3030 WHAT I AM NOT CLAIMING - I am not claiming line-by-line copying, and the case does not rest on it. A binary comparison cannot settle authorship here, because the firmware is compiled for a different architecture than upstream GRBL targets. A BSim comparison against GRBL's planner was inconclusive and is cited nowhere in the record. - I am not claiming a court has found anything, and nothing in the record is a legal conclusion. - I analysed only the 3030-PROVer MAX V3.0 image and make no claim about other models. - I am not a GRBL copyright holder. GRBL's copyright holders are Sungeun K. Jeon and Simen Svale Skogsrud, together with contributors to gnea/grbl. WHAT I AM ASKING YOU Whether this is a case you would take up with GRBL's copyright holders, and if not, what you would recommend a recipient do next. I am also happy to be told that I have got something wrong. The page carries a standing correction notice and I will fix or withdraw anything that is shown to be inaccurate. I can supply any of the artefacts above on request, including the original download with its browser-written provenance metadata. The resolution I actually want is the simple one, and it remains available to SainSmart at any time: publish the Corresponding Source next to the firmware download. That satisfies section 6(d) directly and resolves the matter for every user at once, rather than one support ticket at a time. Thank you for your time. Jason M. Shaner myemail937@gmail.com https://jmscnc.com/3030