linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Documentation: Add a file explaining the requested Linux kernel license enforcement policy

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: <20171023075022.GA2821@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Oct 2017 09:50:22 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Pavel Nikulin <nikulinpi@...il.com>
Cc:     Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Documentation: Add a file explaining the requested
 Linux kernel license enforcement policy

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 10:16:12PM +0300, Pavel Nikulin wrote:
> If you say that your lawyers have comprehensively researched that,
> I can't say they did a good job.

Is there a open source knowledgable lawyer that you recommend we work
with in place of the ones that were consulted for this statement?

Remember, get two lawyers in a room, and you now have 3 opinions :)

I know that not everyone we consulted agreed with everything in the
document, but that's to be expected.  However, they all agreed that for
the issue we are currently facing, this statement will make a difference
and help resolve the issue.

If you don't agree with this, that's great, don't sign onto the
agreement.  But as you don't seem to be part of our community in the
first place, I don't really understand your concern here at all.

thanks,

greg k-h