linux-kernel - Gratuitous licenses are revocable

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]

Date:   Mon, 24 Sep 2018 13:53:28 +0000
From:   gratuitouslicensesarerevocable@...chan.it
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Gratuitous licenses are revocable

Gratuitous licenses are revocable by the grantor.

Each of the gratis linux kernel contributors can revoke their license 
grant (to the project or anyone else who did not pay consideration) at 
their pleasure.

If and when they are ejected from kernel work, when the gift horse is 
stared in the mouth for not being a feminist, or for not opposing 
child-marraige-of-girls-to-men (allowed by YHWH in Devarim chapter 22 
verse 28 (na'ar), also allowed by Sunni Islam, along with other good 
pro-male religions) with sufficient vigor, or for not supporting other 
aspects of the anglo-american religion... they should do so.

Bruce Perens: You stated you don't "need" stick-in-the-mud contributors 
anymore. Yes you do: old stick-in-the-mud contributors who contributed 
to projects without copyright-assignment can revoke their grant at will 
and put into question the legality of said projects if they wish to.

You seem somewhat ignorant of US law...

> Bruce Perens wrote:
> I am 60 and I *can* deal with this. I have many things to get done, and
> can't afford to have the stick-in-the-mud guys on a project any longer. 
> If
> you want to paint yourself into a corner, that is your right, but IMO 
> it's
> a poor choice.

It is disgusting that you, Bruce Perens,  express a will to treat gratis 
contributors as if they were employees or servants of yourself: that the 
moment you imagine that you do not rely on them anymore, you assert a 
will to eject them because they do not follow your belief  system.  They 
can and they should strike back against you in such a case, and against 
all who attempt to impose upon them.

> Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Luckily on LKML he or she got almost no attention.
Sometimes silence is assent. You will notice that no one has refuted the 
issue I have raised in any detail. Why do you think Moglen has had the 
FSF collecting copyright assignments for decades? Did you really think 
the publicly released story was all there was to it?