linux-kernel - Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:27:15 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc:	Helge Hafting <helge.hafting@...el.hist.no>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Michiel de Boer <x@...elhomicide.demon.nl>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> thats the interpretation that has been accepted several times in out of 
> court GPL violation settlements.

I think you can push that angle, and a lot of the time it will work in 
practice - because the companies involved are really not "evil", and most 
often they simply want to avoid any trouble. 

At the same time, in many cases the settlements seem to be very much about 
real issues, like not actually following the GPLv2 (giving no credit, not 
mentioning the license, not making sources available). Rather than about 
any imagined or real lock-down issues.

There's certainly a _correlation_ between "locking down" and "being sleazy 
in general", but I don't think it's necessarily a causal relationship. 

			Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/