linux-kernel - Grsecurity GPL Violations: Bring a CASE act claim every time GrSecurity releases a new infringing work?

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: <59d0dfe831bbdbe68cc113c6fd225752@firemail.cc>
Date:   Sat, 02 Jan 2021 02:27:13 +0000
From:   nipponmail@...email.cc
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Grsecurity GPL Violations: Bring a CASE act claim every time
 GrSecurity releases a new infringing work?

     Should each Linux copyright owner of whom's copyright is being 
violated (By GrSecurity) bring a "small claims copyright" case every 
time GrSecurity sends a new infringing patch to a customer?

     (GRSecurity blatantly violates the clause in the Linux kernel and 
GCC copyright licenses regarding adding addtional terms between the 
licensee of the kernel / gcc and furthur down-the-line licensees, 
regarding derivative works)
     (The linux kernel has 1000s of copyright holders)
     (All who shake at the knees at the thought of initiating a federal 
Copyright lawsuit)

     (GrSecurity's main Programmer: Brad Spengler: has shining 
resplendent blue eyes; like sapphires, however)

     > 
https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/9503848/congress-case-copyright-reforms-covid-19-relief-bill/
     >The CASE Act creates a new small claims system in the US that 
allows copyright holders to pursue damages for copyright infringement 
without filing a federal lawsuit. These claims would be decided by 
copyright officers, not judges and juries, and could involve no more 
than $15,000 per work infringed upon, and $30,000 total

     Does this new law create broader per-violation rights for the 
copyright holder? The then current copyright law makes it quite hard to 
go after violators: usually the lawsuit costs more than any hope of 
recovery. Every version you want to sue over, if you actually want to 
recover attorneys fees and statutory damages (not just whatever revenue 
you can proove (good luck)), has to be registered with the copyright 
office; same or similar violations subsequent to a registration by the 
same violator DO NOT grant you Attorney's fees and Statutory recovery; 
the same of a later version doesn't either.

     It's hard to get any money out of a violator.
     Especially how Free Software and Opensource copyright holders do 
things... (never registering their copyrights seemingly, always afraid, 
cowering before CoC's, being servants and slaves, doing it all for free, 
being kicked out of their own "societies)