1. Giving the appearance of compliance
2. Refusing to provide the source to their modified bootloader, even though they made changes that introduced security vulnerabilities
3. Providing source code to a version of Linux, just not the one that they actually ship, and hoping that nobody notices
4. Dragging out GPL code requests for months on end, then inexplicably going silent

Comments:
Having a solid Contributor License Agreement process in place would probably be a good idea. That way, it’s clear who owns the code that comes in and encourages people to contribute while defining a (necessary evil) process for doing so. You’ll lose random passers-by, but just one passer-by who gets litigious could be more of a headache than it’s worth.

I’m not sure if the idea of a contributor license as you suggest is in the spirit of open source.

In particular, make sure you actually own the copyrights or have a distribution license for everything you intend to open source. All it takes is one lazy cowboy coder and Google to screw your whole project. Also, understand the license you intend to distribute under, and what licenses are incompatible with it.

Or does corporate America avoid this entire opportunity/entanglement/briar patch?

Yes, to a large degree, and they’re stuck in the last century. IP has always been an imaginary government monopoly meant to enhance the business interests of a certain caste; originally that was the author/inventor, but that ship has long sailed – now it’s corporate profits almost exclusively (and you may find exceptions that prove the rule).

watch the article here. http://blog-j.homelinux.com/?p=208 …..it just say how to install and use PORTCONTROL ..in spanish of course..