[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c5dabd99-45fd-bb3a-20eb-d3f0fe03bf28@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:53:24 -0700
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To: aconcernedfossdev@...mail.cc, ubuntu-users@...ts.ubuntu.com,
ubuntu-devel-discuss@...ts.ubuntu.com, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of
GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the
Linux Kernel?
On 6/15/2017 8:34 AM, aconcernedfossdev@...mail.cc 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?
Email lists are never* the correct mechanism for the resolution
of legal issues. If someone from these email lists is working
to address a legal issue you are extremely unlikely to see any
evidence of it on an email list.
---
* I am not a lawyer. Do not construe this as legal advice.
> Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way of BSD?
>
>
> (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 copyright**:
> youtube.com/watch?v=CYnhI3wUej8
> (A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
