From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Harald Welte <laforge@gnumonks.org>,
Ben Slusky <sluskyb@paranoiacs.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, legal@lists.gnumonks.org,
"Robert W. Fuller" <garbageout@sbcglobal.net>,
LKML Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>,
info@crossmeta.com
Subject: Re: blatant GPL violation of ext2 and reiserfs filesystem drivers
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 15:57:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060104155714.GD12824@mail.shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060104144540.GN19769@parisc-linux.org>
> Yes. You're not a lawyer. Stop wasting everybody's time by trying to
> interpret a legal document.
Matthew, thanks for your abuse. It was not necessary.
As a programmer, it is essential that I, like others, have a
reasonable understanding of the GPL. It is not written only for
lawyers. I did not nitpick something esoteric; I nitpicked something
which is important to real people who deal in GPL software which is
not available to the public.
> > That sentence is not clear to me. Are you're saying that it was
> > possible to download the object code without source code, or that
> > _only_ the object code was available?
>
> Why don't you go and look instead of quibbling in the abstract?
> The binary is *currently* available, and no source code is.
Because this thread kept using the past tense to say what crossmeta
_have_ done. As it's still available, why mention 'third parties'?
They're irrelevant; the violation is quite straightforward.
> > No. They must provide the 'written offer' to the person downloading
> > the binary, if they did not make available source code to that person.
>
> Why are you bothering to nitpick Harald?
Because he wrote something that, _without context_, is a technical
mistake that people sometimes make when talking about the GPL. Like
you, I consider it my duty to ensure the GPL is upheld, and in the
proper way. I appreciate now that Harald understands it well and his
statement was a simplification; others, may not. I've been writing
GPL software for 15 years; it's not a new thing to me.
Please understand that I didn't receive these messages through a
legal-experts list, where of course I would be far more cautious to
comment; I received them on a software development list.
> Do you not realise he understands the GPL better than you do, having
> agreed over 30 settlements against people violating it? He's even
> got courts to grant injunctions!
That's correct. I did not realise that. That's great! But I haven't
known Harald's name before; and also did not know this thread had
reached the point of someone actually handling the legal end.
-- Jamie (goodbye)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-04 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-22 16:08 blatant GPL violation of ext2 and reiserfs filesystem drivers Robert W. Fuller
2005-12-22 18:01 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-12-22 20:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-12-22 23:12 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2005-12-23 2:56 ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-12-23 3:15 ` Diego Calleja
2005-12-23 3:28 ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-12-23 3:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-12-23 3:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2005-12-23 4:25 ` Jamie Lokier
2005-12-23 3:30 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-12-23 15:35 ` Ben Slusky
2005-12-23 19:34 ` Bryan Henderson
2005-12-23 20:16 ` Scott Mansfield
2005-12-23 22:00 ` Bryan Henderson
2005-12-24 1:48 ` Horst von Brand
2005-12-24 2:41 ` Peter Williams
2005-12-24 3:25 ` Jamie Lokier
2006-01-04 11:09 ` Harald Welte
2006-01-04 11:54 ` Jamie Lokier
2006-01-04 13:18 ` Harald Welte
2006-01-04 13:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-01-04 17:46 ` Harald Welte
2006-01-04 23:03 ` Gene Heskett
2006-01-04 22:43 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2006-01-04 14:16 ` Jamie Lokier
2006-01-04 14:45 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-01-04 15:57 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2006-01-04 17:42 ` Harald Welte
2006-01-05 17:52 ` Bryan Henderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060104155714.GD12824@mail.shareable.org \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=garbageout@sbcglobal.net \
--cc=info@crossmeta.com \
--cc=laforge@gnumonks.org \
--cc=legal@lists.gnumonks.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mrmacman_g4@mac.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sluskyb@paranoiacs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox