public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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)

  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