linux-kernel - Re: Yes: The linux devs can rescind their license grant. GPLv2 is a bare license and is revocable by the grantor.

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: <45d1521f5aa4962f96f0543bdbae69d9@memeware.net>
Date:   Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:34:37 +0000
From:   vsnsdualce@...eware.net
To:     dng@...ts.dyne.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Yes: The linux devs can rescind their license grant. GPLv2 is a
 bare license and is revocable by the grantor.

> (2) ... (I am not going to go over the legal mistakes you've made,
> because of (1))...

I have not made legal mistakes, pompous programmer a__hole*.

A gratuitous license, absent an attached interest, is revocable at will.

This goes for GPLv2 as used by linux, just as it goes for the BSD 
license(s).
The only entities who have, with regards to BSD, an attached interests
are perhaps those companies who pay for its development. Non-gratis 
(paying) customers
may have some refuge under consumer protection statutes, for current 
versions they have
in their posession, paid for by good consideration.

Everyone else has NOTHING.
Do you understand that?

In the case of the 1000's of linux copyright holders to whom no 
consideration
was given by an entity, and the various BSD copyright holders (read: the 
programmers),
who have not ASSIGNED their copyright over to some other entity, there 
is
NOTHING to hold them to a promise THEY NEVER MADE.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU F___ING PIECE OF S__T?
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT NEITHER THEY NOR YOU HAVE PROMISED NOT TO ELLECT
TO USE YOUR AS-OF-RIGHT OPTION TO RESCIND YOUR GRATUITOUS LICENSE 
REGARDING
YOUR WORK.

One cannot rely on a promise that was never made, additionally many of 
them
were never paid consideration for this non existant promise either.

*(Note: I am both a programmer and an attorney, so I know the type)

On 2018-12-24 16:01, Raul Miller wrote:
> (1) Wrong mailing lists - these are not linux mailing lists.
> 
> (2) ... (I am not going to go over the legal mistakes you've made,
> because of (1))...
> 
> (3) Anyways, ... people do make mistakes... But, please stop making
> these mistakes.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> --
> Raul
>