[Getahobby]

Even if Cisco was running open source code they could still put ALL of this language into this agreement. The difference would be you could see the actual mechanism in work if they had open source code. The egregious part is the language, not the implementation.

[jiggy2011]

Or you could get the code, rip out the parts you didn't like, recompile and install on your router.

You might be breaching the terms & conditions of their cloud stuff, but you could simply choose not to use it.

[Xylakant]

Well, even though I'm pretty technically literate and know my way around a compiler, I probably couldn't do this, even with the source. There's so much knowledge that you need to accumulate. I could probably learn how to do it, but that would take me weeks, if not month. So first, somebody would have to do it. Second, he'd have to maintain it. Then, my less-computer-literate friends would need someone who makes them aware of the issue and points them to the firmware, probably even install it. Most won't bother, check the box and accept the TOS, maybe thinking "I'm not planning on doing anything illegal anyways." - that won't be solved with open source.

Open source protects the technical literate people, but it's not the silver bullet that solves this issue. Raising awareness and pushing back is at least as important and that's possible with closed source as well.

[hammersend]

I think the main difference is that if these routers came from the factory with FLOSS software that I could recompile and reload onto the device then Cisco would have a much harder time actually enforcing their particular implementation.