linux-kernel - RE: Wasting our Freedom

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: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKCEFNGNAC.davids@webmaster.com>
Date:	Sun, 16 Sep 2007 18:35:12 -0700
From:	"David Schwartz" <davids@...master.com>
To:	<bunk@...nel.org>
Cc:	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Wasting our Freedom

> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:29:56PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> 
> >...
> > Again, one more time:
> > 
> > 1) You can obtain, from the GPL, the right to remove a BSD 
> > license notice.
> >...

> I hope noone believes this bullshit you are spreading.

How do you figure?

> When you incorporate BSD licenced code into a GPL'ed project it's 
> impossible that the GPL could give you any permission to remove the 
> BSD licence notice.

That's right. I never said otherwise. I did not say that under all conceivable circumstances, the GPL gives you the right to remove a BSD license notice.

The example I was talking about was a dual-licensed work. If you choose to make modifications under the GPL, then you are not obtaining any righst under the BSD license and are under no obligation to comply with its terms. In that case, the GPL gives you the right to remove the BSD license notice. (The license remains, of course, only the notice is gone.)

You are quite correct in the case of a BSD-only work. Since you still need the right to modify and distribute that work and can only get it from the BSD license, you must comply with the terms of the BSD license. One of those terms is not removing the license *notice*.

You are quite correct that if a work is offered under only the BSD license, the BSD license notice must remain in there forever, you cannot remove it because the license says you can't.

> > > BTW: It is considered impolite on linux-kernel to remove Cc's.
> > 
> > Really? On almost every other forum I know of, the rule is the 
> > reverse. It is rude to CC posts to people who are most likely on 
> > the list anyway.

> linux-kernel is not "almost every other forum I know of".
> 
> Considering how long you are already trolling [1] on linux-kernel
> I'm surprised you haven't heard about this before.

I find offensive your characterization of my attempt at honest debate as trolling.

> [1] Have you ever contributed any patch to the Linux kernel?

Yes, as a matter of fact. A long time ago, I contributed patches to allow the Sony CDU-535 driver to work as a module. For those who forgot, the Sony CDU-535 was one of the very first CD-ROM devices, almost 1X and with a proprietary interface -- an external drive that required a custom ISA card. For some reason, it's still there, though I find it hard to believe anyone has used it in years.

DS

-
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/