linux-kernel - Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.

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: <CAMjeLr8WicqyoahumLNsZCHCaEoPdjXT_1vANvzb+s2-EzzbhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:41:43 -0500
From:   "\\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@...il.com>
To:     Edward Cree <ec429@...tab.net>
Cc:     unconditionedwitness@...chan.it,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.

>> Contributors can, at any time, rescind the license grant regarding their
>> property via written notice to those whom they are rescinding the grant
>> from (regarding their property (code)).
>
> I know others have already said it, but:
> This is legally nonsense.  The only way I can revoke someone's rights to
>  my code under the GPL is if they violate the terms of the GPL.  If I
>  were to do so otherwise, then _I_ would be in violation for having
>  distributed derived works of the kernel without a GPL, not to mention
>  the obvious reliance/estoppel problems.

Actually, like Chris Conrad said, this isn't necessarily the case --
even though you are *contractually* right.

The problem is -- that no one *signed* that contract.  These are
gentle/wo/men's agreements.  They are essentially the same as a
click-wrap agreement in terms of enforceability.

That being said, there is still legal recourse, just as there was/is
with click-wrap agreements.  It's just not clear how much.

Mark Janssen, JD