linux-kernel - Re: GPL weasels and the atheros stink

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]

Message-ID: <31129.1188918652@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:10:52 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	davids@...master.com
Cc:	dhazelton@...er.net, espie@...im.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL weasels and the atheros stink

On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 17:23:37 PDT, David Schwartz said:
> 
> > Wrong - I said "You can't complain about Person A doing X when
> > you let Person
> > B do X without complaint".
> 
> Yes, I can. There is no inconsistency between acting in one case and failing
> to act in another. We need not act in every possible case where we could act
> to preserve our right to act in a particular case.

You *do* however need to be aware that in some cases, public inactivity and/or
statements that something will not be acted on may estoppel any future attempts
to enforce something.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped