Re: OpenBSD bcw: Possible GPL license violation issues

[Pieter Hulshoff <phulshof@xs4all.nl>]

Theo de Raadt <deraadt@...> writes: 
> So next time, talk to the specific people, so you don't come off 
> as being mean, ok? 
 
I'm sorry to say this Theo, but you do realize this code was available in the 
CVS tree, right? Users, especially companies, that use this tree would very 
likely be interested in knowing that at some point in time this tree contained 
infringing code, so they can avoid using that version in their own product 
without being called on it later. If you think this PR is bad, just imagine a 
company pointing back at your tree as the source for the copyright infringement 
within their product. 
 
This is about trust: if I am to use your code, then I need to be able to trust 
that there is no infringing code in it, and that if copyright infringement 
should occur (accidently) at some point in time, that such is discussed in the 
open so I can avoid (accidently) using that code in my product. 
 
With the definition of derivative work as it is, I would think that a clean 
room approach should be advocated at all times to prevent mistakes like this 
from happening. 
 
Kind regards, 
 
Pieter Hulshoff