From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 18:32:43 +0000
Message-ID: <20121111183243.62602d9b@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk>
References: <509A915B.30105@redhat.com>
	<1352626456.6524.46.camel@dabdike>
	<20121111130553.GA30943@thunk.org>
	<87390gxjbd.fsf@ebb.org>
	<1352658157.6524.58.camel@dabdike>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1352658157.6524.58.camel@dabdike>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@sfconservancy.org>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com>, "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>, target-devel <target-devel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Marc Fleischmann <mwf@risingtidesystems.com>, Nicholas Bellinger <nab@risingtidesystems.com>
List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org

> >      1. Yes, I've got first hand proof of a GPL violation (in which case
> >         we'll then move to seeing how we can remedy this) or
> >      2. A genuine public apology for the libel, which I'll do my best to
> >         prevail on RTS to accept.
> > 
> > Because any further discussion of unsubstantiated allegations of this
> > nature exposes us all to jeopardy of legal sanction.
> 
> That asks for moderation until we have a better investigation of the
> facts.  It definitely doesn't try to prejudge them or express preference
> for a specific outcome as your misquote makes out.

So how can you demand a public apology for libel or instant first hand
proof and now claim you just wanted moderation ? It's not hard to see why
your position was misinterpreted ?

Alan