From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261629AbULUJ5J (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:57:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261633AbULUJ5J (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:57:09 -0500 Received: from holomorphy.com ([207.189.100.168]:17799 "EHLO holomorphy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261629AbULUJ4l (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:56:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:56:36 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III To: "Jeff V. Merkey" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jmerkey@gadugi.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.9 and the GPL Buyout Message-ID: <20041221095636.GJ771@holomorphy.com> References: <20041220212723.GA8634@mail.gadugi.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041220212723.GA8634@mail.gadugi.org> Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 03:27:23PM -0600, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: [...] > Despite dubious reporting and wild conjecture, the buyout was not geared > towards helping SCO, or in concert with M$ as some sort of grand > conspiracy. It was geared towards creating a new licensing and legal > model for open source development. The Cherokee Nation is enacting > legislation to promote open source development. So the whole buyout > was me and a few folks attempting to convert Linux GPL code into > a licensing model and Cherokee Nation Copyrights that renders the > code sovereign and immune from litigation outside of tribal courts > and jurisdiction. So much for all the SCO and other legal wranglings > regarding this effort and open source in general. We are immune from > these people and so are any projects that use our licensing or host > on our servers. I personally told Darl "Mad Dog" McBride at SCO > good luck and to buzz off. [...] As interesting and informative as this is, maybe there needs to be a mailing list (linux-politics-discuss?) or something to serve as an appropriate outlet for these kinds of discussions (as well as bitkeeper licensing issues, C++ modules, etc.). It's a bit difficult to appreciate the relevance of this kind of "political" message to a list dedicated to kernel programming and cold, hard code. Congratulations on your new directions and position. I hope there will soon be a place for which your informative announcements are more appropriate than linux-kernel. - wli