| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <loom.20120201T082213-806@post.gmane.org> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 07:39:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Matthias Urlichs <matthias@...ichs.de> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Linux GPL becomes unenforcable? Yesterday I chatted with a lawyer friend of mine, prompted by blog posts like http://www.elpauer.org/?p=1146 . Basically, she said that it's becoming more and more likely that the kernel GPL will not be enforceable in the not-too-distant-future, simply because nobody is doing it right now. Disclaimer: He was not on retainer, at least not by me, so this should not be construed as a legal fact. (But she convinced me.) So what to do? Do we just admit defeat? Or will a few of the major contributors allow the SFLC <http://www.softwarefreedom.org> to intercede? Personally I'm very unhappy that [censored] companies like Sony try to prevent my burning a copy of their DVD -- there's no other way to skip the eternity of unrelated bulls*it -- yet they openly solicit co-authors for a Busybox replacement. Because *that* copyleft *is* enforced. Sorry, but I want our kernel to stay free. And I want that kind of double standard to stop. I'm going to contact them today, but the one module I wrote isn't likely to be included in any of these devices. So would a couple of people whose contribution *is* relevant please step forward? -- -- Matthias Urlichs -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists