From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_SBL_A autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D311FECE560 for ; Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:50:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B43C206B8 for ; Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:50:44 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7B43C206B8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=christoph-conrads.name Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726422AbeIWUsZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:48:25 -0400 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:60833 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726280AbeIWUsZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:48:25 -0400 Received: from theta ([188.102.175.194]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue002 [212.227.15.167]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MFDEx-1g12la3Zql-00GHSj; Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:50:37 +0200 Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:50:50 +0200 From: Christoph Conrads To: Edward Cree Cc: unconditionedwitness@redchan.it, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it. Message-Id: <20180923165050.56674786772aaa0985f5ba53@christoph-conrads.name> In-Reply-To: References: <20180919081812.020f19e3@lwn.net> <72dadc76-44fe-ecb5-e142-0a9129082c93@cantab.net> <20180920041846.GA4418@1wt.eu> <206423b0a199c1f12e61364d6e687e09@redchan.it> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:YGb875kx0ioqGHdmcXFFuouQEAkz4wj9UsyGAqZ/0MYstgziF4g 9NXZQ/aFI0qh1RyGMkrc7QtbGIec9yLeMdxDHfkuZT9p4fKOlYLCWGQf/pfgeRhgILMh+tB YniWWt1s2W0Ls3DHGttddhOlHWGfQqLWYtnhK+JtUyFkilNxNM89V0CQSBeO+V2OIOlhCml 9p/UWFvpJWBuSaLk13gwA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:a2l75YPFg30=:ejgF2Cxbb3a4BeDO+ATB/F +Z11/hLoLZoXKyG0o4HKvZUvlf6xGKsQi+jiBx+uRPBaWNlDjpnQt/zhogwyMBlWA/ni1PtSi YOp61+VjmA7DL8YSMydtm6eR9pUKuWBLKXFkgnUTESTbET1V7BwnR85e0SUr4z1TKKcIWFdAm 2VJrWMbapHVnNUX03YFUJerH1lmQyoLZ3qvx5NKRJevxNgJPaYejffNGUzJk4U09g0VNbb6ST GzwlfNpUY/6JVIjpwWOKOHfYMaOwRTUXezm4syXpd3gH8s/zKN+5wS0NayjRqY+JMnsOMaBu8 PwfjMVA/Exf4MNhQGhfi/LQmD7VIkO7X5TA8j+fRYutAMtnODc8SSq5o/ed/wKO29KK+nbrTn lb9E22P6LmSK/03he8gZY7T0PbzDhGbfr+9D8U/qfNT8hDD94mZPFgDtsBWgCbbi6j+k34gAm MYMaNk681WUVb/k4q0AX3U0C78Xw7EptBG2/OwjKpCuq/tjt8FUkpseGXtDmARq/XdrjnSWQs rld6rzslavkD1byWvvrAMoDTueM18Iwvbm5OQwEoTCh7Vey5ihgdiMuoB3JVPF5jSbY2vUZaH 0Sa8JtaD+2x8Z/s5Gk1nRwXMO9mWpk0bQv0mAL3n8D60hSQNfHHauzCTduG3IZs/V4xiYo9qF 4BhyZWBCigxPQpqqY85IRnMvLigrZqhrCAoUpB0EjWgpEwdaKFctWWkNsk5fCKkD3naNn3ECi kGASzZs095x0q6+A Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dear Edward, > I know others have already said it, but: > This is legally nonsense. The only way I can revoke someone's rights to > my code under the GPL is if they violate the terms of the GPL. this aspect of FOSS licenses has -- to the best of my knowledge -- never been tested in court. Actually, the Free Software Foundation felt compelled to clarify this point in GPLv3 and there is a thread on StackOverflow acknowledging the possibility of revoking a license [1]. Finally, revoking the license may very well be possible in some jurisdictions but not all of them, e.g., Australia [2]. There are 195 independent states in this world and I do not think you can make such a broad claim if it has never been legally contested before. By the way your e-mail is violating the code of coduct. > This is legally nonsense. You are not empathic towards others and respectful of differing viewpoints. > In short, "unconditionedwitness", please shut up. You're not helping. The comment is derogatory if not downright offensive. [1] https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/832/is-a-copyright-license-by-default-revocable-or-irrevocable [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20091024034824/http://www.ilaw.com.au/public/licencearticle.html Sincerely Christoph Conrads On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 23:57:15 +0100 Edward Cree wrote: > On 20/09/18 10:27, unconditionedwitness@redchan.it wrote: > > Contributors can, at any time, rescind the license grant regarding their > > property via written notice to those whom they are rescinding the grant > > from (regarding their property (code)). > > I know others have already said it, but: > This is legally nonsense. The only way I can revoke someone's rights to > my code under the GPL is if they violate the terms of the GPL. If I > were to do so otherwise, then _I_ would be in violation for having > distributed derived works of the kernel without a GPL, not to mention > the obvious reliance/estoppel problems. > > Moreover, even if I _could_ revoke the license, I wouldn't want to do > so; it would be ridiculously petty in itself and the precedent it would > set would be destructive to the entire open-source community, about > which I care deeply. It is _because_ Linux and other open-source > projects are so important to humanity that I spoke up about what I > perceive as a threat to it. > > In short, "unconditionedwitness", please shut up. You're not helping.