[Hero, G2 Touch Android Development] jaduncan:
Gah.

Merely because there is a potential copyright claim by the copyright holder does not mean that other claims do not exist. The point of the French case is that the source code release is part of the items reasonably expected to be sold. Relevant EU law (and yes, EU directives apply Union-wide) is below:

Directive 99/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees.

Consumer goods must be in conformity with the contract of sale.

Goods are deemed to be in conformity with the contract if, at the moment of delivery to the consumer:

* they comply with the description given by the seller and possess the qualities of the product which the seller has held out to the consumer as a sample or model;

* they are fit for the purposes for which goods of the same type are normally used;

* they are fit for any particular purpose for which the consumer requires them and which was made known to the seller at the time of conclusion of the contract, and accepted by the seller;

* their quality and performance are satisfactory, given the nature of the goods and taking into account the public statements made about them by the seller, the producer or his representative.

The seller is liable to the consumer for any lack of conformity which exists when the goods are delivered to the consumer and which becomes apparent within a period of two years unless, at the moment of conclusion of the contract of sale, the consumer knew or could not reasonably be unaware of the lack of conformity.

If the goods are not in conformity with the public statements made by the producer or their representative, the seller will not be liable if they show that :

* they did not know and could not reasonably know the statement in question;

* they corrected the statement at the time of sale;

* the decision to buy the goods could not have been influenced by the statement.

Any lack of conformity resulting from incorrect installation of the consumer goods is deemed to be equivalent to lack of conformity of the goods if installation forms part of the contract of sale of the goods and the goods were installed by the seller or under their responsibility. This applies equally if the product, intended to be installed by the consumer, is installed by the consumer and the incorrect installation is due to a shortcoming in the installation instructions.

Any lack of conformity becoming apparent within six months of delivery will be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery, unless:

* proof to the contrary is furnished;

* this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.

When a lack of conformity is notified to the seller, the consumer will be entitled to ask:

* for the goods to be repaired or replaced free of charge within a reasonable period and without major inconvenience to the consumer;

* for an appropriate reduction to be made to the price, or for the contract to be rescinded, if repair or replacement is impossible or disproportionate, or if the seller has not remedied the shortcoming within a reasonable period or without major inconvenience to the consumer.

The lack of conformity means that specific performance can be demanded.

In the UK this would also fall under the The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002.

" PART 5A

ADDITIONAL RIGHTS OF BUYER IN CONSUMER CASES

48A Introductory

(1) This section applies if -

(a) the buyer deals as consumer or, in Scotland, there is a consumer contract in which the buyer is a consumer, and

(b) the goods do not conform to the contract of sale at the time of delivery.

(2) If this section applies, the buyer has the right -

(a) under and in accordance with section 48B below, to require the seller to repair or replace the goods, or

(b) under and in accordance with section 48C below -

(i) to require the seller to reduce the purchase price of the goods to the buyer by an appropriate amount, or

(ii) to rescind the contract with regard to the goods in question.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above goods which do not conform to the contract of sale at any time within the period of six months starting with the date on which the goods were delivered to the buyer must be taken not to have so conformed at that date.

(4) Subsection (3) above does not apply if -

(a) it is established that the goods did so conform at that date;

(b) its application is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.

48B Repair or replacement of the goods

(1) If section 48A above applies, the buyer may require the seller -

(a) to repair the goods, or

(b) to replace the goods.

Repair of the goods in this case would mean supplying the missing part. One of the parts supplied was a promise of source under the correct conditions, and this promise is a contractual commitment as the consumer receives consideration (this means provision of a material thing) of the source under the contract that they gave consideration for by paying for the phone and/or committing to a phone service contract.

Is that clearer?

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.