From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B89C49D
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:58:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com
	[66.63.167.143])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FBE4246
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:58:40 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1472241517.5189.88.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@coreos.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 15:58:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAPeXnHsu4Jd6DkwuCx=T5w4YFYnF6zfoHYv1ixP_akr40agfWA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+55aFxLRqket8-yCL=FPM0Bz86PxdS+hRSTzXES+=1bOv=feg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPeXnHs_9=m9R+JO=O_p_Q390b1DgnsKyMgP6kGiPyBGn=+3_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+55aFxXroS=_Mfyg+-3WF0KwqvPXJBKT0tjryWbDUx6G9Qvkw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPeXnHvMUOL4M6y7_9oEF6ovrasfSY9Zqn2tRs-dRst9SS1jYQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+55aFxZTeJoPqRCHX+o_eEJ4RGDC_rOk6ZuL1Vz8Bk+7LfkfQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1472225332.2751.56.camel@redhat.com>
	<CA+55aFxLB+1TtSPR9C5HG1+boZcGrub6VMATCa_Og9Jg51ttZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1472230114.2751.67.camel@redhat.com>
	<CA+55aFxedcKe7q1SsVK48zkrzmUHwb8p3g8oKAHR4nUsbsobxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPeXnHswT0dSvdzvc1p7yr_cewXrX1mHi0dQE=p1E4sFkjn=HQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+55aFyOSV0cRGEHWjsKMxsxjs6Kp6oghpE+-ueVFi7irnmSCA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPeXnHvKF2sPoiBiDCMEiguR1QScn5wNpQ7deaz=MDxofReNOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1472241199.5189.86.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
	<CAPeXnHsu4Jd6DkwuCx=T5w4YFYnF6zfoHYv1ixP_akr40agfWA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@sfconservancy.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues
List-Id: <ksummit-discuss.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>

On Fri, 2016-08-26 at 15:55 -0400, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 3:53 PM, James Bottomley
> <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-08-26 at 15:45 -0400, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > We agree that quiet negotiation is the preferred tactic. We agree
> > > that lawsuits may be necessary as a final resort. It doesn't seem
> > > like we're disagreeing on anything fundamental in that respect. 
> > > What Karen has suggested is an opportunity for the kernel 
> > > community to give clear input into when that final resort should 
> > > be acceptable.
> > 
> > I think the disagreement is over *when* you give up and go for the
> > final resort.  And who you trust to take that decision.
> 
> Doesn't that sound like a worthwhile thing to discuss at Kernel 
> Summit?

Give me a framework for how you'd propose agreeing a resolution on that
one.  I'm asking because it's very much something that's likely to
produce a lot of heat and very little light.

James