Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-06-14T04:01:26Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1125 bytes --]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 04:56:40 +0200, Adrian Bunk said:

> Reality check:
>
> Harald convinced companies that they have to provide the private keys
> required to run the Linux kernel they ship on their hardware.

No, the *real* reality check:

The operative words here are "convinced companies" - as opposed to "convinced
a judge to rule that private keys are required to be disclosed". (I just
checked around on gpl-violations.org, and I don't see any news items that say
they actually generated citable case law on the topic of keys...)

Harald convinced companies that it was easier/cheaper/faster to provide the
private keys than to continue in a long legal battle with an uncertain outcome.
If the company estimates the total loss due to keys being released is US$100K,
but the costs of taking it to court are estimated at US$200K, it's obviously
a win (lesser loss, actually) for the company to just fold.

Incidentally, this same logic is what drives the average successful patent
troll lawsuit - the sued company will buy a license for $25K, just because
they know that fighting the lawsuit will cost $100K and up.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 226 bytes --]