linux-kernel - The copyright to the linux kernel is being violated by GRSecurity, why is this OK?

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8fd283defd08c0b71da8bb35553bb19c@airmail.cc>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:17:09 +0000
From:   aconcernedfossdev@...mail.cc
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: The copyright to the linux kernel is being violated by GRSecurity,
 why is this OK?

The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the 
imposition of additional terms.
The making of an understanding that the derivative work must not be 
redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is the imposition of an 
additional term.
The communication of this threat is the moment that GRSecurity violates 
the license grant.
Thence-forth modification, making of derivative works, and distribution 
of such is a violation of the Copyright statute.
The concoction of the transparent scheme shows that it is a willful 
violation, one taken in full knowledge by GRSecurity of the intention of 
the original grantor.

(Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch, 
they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a 
threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme 
to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of 
entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their 
patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does 
not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works, 
GRSecurity does.).