linux-kernel - Re: Fwd: That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing

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: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0709041621320.8447@chaos.analogic.com>
Date:	Tue, 4 Sep 2007 16:28:57 -0400
From:	"linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <linux-os@...logic.com>
To:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
Cc:	"Daniel Hazelton" <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	"Krzysztof Halasa" <khc@...waw.pl>, <davids@...master.com>,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing

On Tue, 4 Sep 2007, Chris Friesen wrote:

> Daniel Hazelton wrote:
>> On Tuesday 04 September 2007 09:27:02 Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
>>
>>> Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> US Copyright law. A copyright holder, regardless of what license he/she
>>>> may have released the work under, can still revoke the license for a
>>>> specific person or group of people. (There are some exceptions, but they
>>>> do not apply to the situation that is being discussed)
>
> The OpenBSD policy page doesn't agree with you:
>
> "...That means that having granted a permission, the copyright holder
> can not retroactively say that an individual or class of individuals are
> no longer granted those permissions. Likewise should the copyright
> holder decide to "go commercial" he can not revoke permissions already
> granted for the use of the work as distributed, though he may impose
> more restrictive permissions in his future distributions of that work."
>
> http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html
>
>
> Chris
> -

There are other enforceability issues as well. For instance in the
US, Copyright Law applies as soon as something is written. So,
does Copyright Law apply if I write, "You cannot read this."
Of course, it's a trivial example. Revocation of a license to
read a work is absurd. Using this theory, once somebody's
written "work" has been distributed under some license, a
different license would likely be regarded as unenforceable
by a court.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.6.22.1 on an i686 machine (5588.30 BogoMips).
My book : http://www.AbominableFirebug.com/
_

****************************************************************
The information transmitted in this message is confidential and may be privileged.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Analogic Corporation immediately - by replying to this message or by sending an email to DeliveryErrors@...logic.com - and destroy all copies of this information, including any attachments, without reading or disclosing them.

Thank you.
-
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/