On December 4, 2025, California Superior Court Judge Sandy N. Leal issued a tentative ruling that could fundamentally change GPL enforcement. The judge ruled that Vizio must provide complete Linux source code for their SmartCast TVs to Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC)—not because SFC holds the copyright, but because they purchased a TV. If this precedent holds at trial in January 2026, any consumer who buys a device with GPL software could sue the manufacturer for non-compliance. That’s millions of potential plaintiffs for every smart TV, router, and IoT device running Linux.
Consumers Can Enforce GPL: A Legal First
SFC sued Vizio in October 2021 with a novel legal strategy: they claimed “third-party beneficiary” rights under contract law. When Vizio distributed TVs with Linux, they entered a GPL contract with Linux developers. As purchasers, SFC argued they inherit enforcement rights from that contract—even though they don’t hold the copyright.
Traditional GPL enforcement requires being a copyright holder. Only Linux developers could sue Vizio for violations. However, the third-party beneficiary approach changes that calculus entirely. Judge Leal’s tentative ruling found that when SFC requested source code, a direct contract was formed obligating Vizio to provide it. Moreover, the court stated that allowing third parties “to enforce their rights to receive source code is not only consistent with the GPLs’ objectives; it is both essential and necessary to achieve these objectives.”
The implications are stark. If this precedent stands, companies using GPL software in consumer devices face exponentially higher risk. Instead of defending against a handful of copyright holders, they could face legal action from any end user. Legal analysts at DLA Piper warn this “could open the door for any other end user to also bring claims to enforce [GPL] provisions—dramatically increasing the potential liability for noncompliance with open-source licenses.”
Vizio’s Tracking Software and the GPL Fight
This isn’t just about licensing technicalities. Vizio’s SmartCast TVs run Linux but bundle proprietary Automatic Content Recognition (ACR) software that tracks viewing habits second-by-second for targeted advertising. When SFC requested the source code—which GPLv2 requires Vizio to provide—Vizio refused. Furthermore, SFC explicitly wanted the code to develop an open-source alternative that would strip out surveillance features.
Vizio’s tracking history is troubling. In 2016, the FTC revealed Vizio’s ACR software captured “as many as 100 billion data points each day from millions of TVs,” tracking 11 million customers without proper consent. The company paid $2.2 million to settle charges. Consequently, GPL source code access would enable consumers to audit, modify, and remove tracking software from devices they own—exactly what Vizio wants to prevent.
This is where GPL enforcement meets consumer rights. Companies like Vizio benefit from free Linux while denying users the freedoms GPL is supposed to guarantee: the right to understand, modify, and control software on devices they purchased. Therefore, the case connects open source licensing to privacy rights and device ownership in ways traditional copyright enforcement never could.
Trial Set for January 2026: What’s at Stake
The December 4 ruling is tentative—it could change after oral arguments held the same day. The full trial is scheduled for January 12, 2026. If SFC wins, Vizio will almost certainly appeal, dragging the case out for years. Nevertheless, each legal hurdle the case clears strengthens the precedent.
The case has already survived multiple attempts to dismiss it. Filed in October 2021, it survived a motion to dismiss in 2022 and a summary judgment challenge on the third-party beneficiary theory in January 2024. The tentative ruling marks another milestone in what’s become a 4-year legal battle.
Companies watching this case closely include anyone shipping GPL software in consumer devices: router manufacturers, smart home vendors, automotive systems, medical devices, and IoT products. If SFC wins, they face a choice: proactively comply with GPL source code requirements or risk lawsuits from any customer. Additionally, some may abandon GPL entirely in favor of permissive licenses like MIT or Apache, which don’t require source code distribution. Either outcome reshapes the open source ecosystem.
GPL Enforcement Meets Right-to-Repair
This case arrives as the right-to-repair movement gains momentum. In 2025, Oregon banned “parts pairing,” Washington passed consumer electronics repair legislation, and 84% of Americans support right-to-repair laws according to recent surveys. Software has become a primary barrier to repair—companies use firmware locks and proprietary code to prevent modifications even after purchase.
The Free Software Foundation notes that “GPL enforcement is one of the best tools we’ve got for getting manufacturers to free their software in a way that’s useful for repair.” With source code access, independent developers could create security patches for abandoned devices, fix bugs manufacturers ignore, and bypass planned obsolescence. In fact, the Vizio case could establish that software freedom and hardware freedom are legally intertwined.
Key Takeaways
- Third-party beneficiary enforcement: The December 4 tentative ruling finds that consumers who purchase devices with GPL software may have contractual rights to enforce source code requirements—not just copyright holders.
- Vizio’s refusal to provide Linux source code: SFC purchased a SmartCast TV to develop privacy-respecting firmware, but Vizio refused to provide the GPL-required source code. Vizio previously paid $2.2M to settle FTC charges for tracking 11 million customers without consent.
- Trial scheduled for January 12, 2026: The tentative ruling could change after oral arguments. If SFC wins at trial, Vizio will likely appeal. The case has already survived 4 years of legal challenges since filing in October 2021.
- Massive implications for GPL compliance: If this precedent stands, companies using GPL software in consumer products could face lawsuits from any end user, not just copyright holders. This could either force better compliance or push companies toward permissive licenses.
- Right-to-repair connection: GPL source code access enables consumers to audit, modify, and repair devices they own. This case aligns with 2025’s right-to-repair momentum, treating software freedom as essential to device ownership.
