Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:10:23 -0400
- From: rhkramer@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
Hmm, am I feeding the spammer? Some comments to the OP interspersed below--or
maybe I'll just top post...
I don't know too much about the issue, and your second paragraph doesn't help
Let me ask, does Linus care--has he or some other noteworthy in the Linux /
foss world made some sort of comment?
And have they started any sort of proceeding (negotiation, legal proceeding,
I care about FOSS (or foss) and think that "users" in any sense of the word
should comply with the appropriate licenses, and, if they don't some sort of
action should be undertaken to enforce compliance.
So, why don't you cite a few (or one) cogent explanation of the problem and
the position by a "noteworthy" (for lack of a better term).
PS: aconcernedfossdev doesn't "command" much respect in my mind, especially
with no better explanation of the problem than what I read here.
On Thursday, June 15, 2017 11:41:56 AM aconcernedfossdev@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
> violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
> He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by
> his scheme to prevent redistribution.
> The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the
> imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that the
> derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is
> the imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat
> is the moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth
> modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is a
> violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the transparent
> scheme shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge
> by GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.
> Why does not one person here care?
> Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way of
> (Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch,
> they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a
> threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme
> to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of
> entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their
> patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does
> not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works,
> GRSecurity does.).
> ( This song is about GRSecurity's violation of Linus et al's
> (A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )