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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED 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 1CB05C169C4 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 09:38:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 416DC214DA for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 09:38:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redchan.it header.i=@redchan.it header.b="zW//EIhz" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728219AbfA2Jia (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 04:38:30 -0500 Received: from cock.li ([185.100.85.212]:47344 "EHLO cock.li" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726383AbfA2Ji3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 04:38:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=redchan.it; s=mail; t=1548754704; bh=u8BBeBkvAhGOvEEsF13WXdHow9crP1XhfDVD0rOAlL4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=zW//EIhzM/kp4Q8T5lTOQU3/4L8NFKxjJfOkXK84KdSSPm5mn4XEzr3rtTU/9pjcV gXHgccD5uaGWe3kUAjzQpd0bHc7KwbR/mgdsAJZDs2Eeazgelynh769WW5LqOvalap sqVmZYGUlusuVKyXoqKppSShCVPtR4vV00iqbHLmj6Q/RTIRau3Lb3VW06jTAPy7lt GqK0kD7MmkmchcKBMrG5rbiHUQocypYC9xANXw1yQRxktagyBOYtwtmKhRliQuWd79 iH2dh7JCdVi+yNLmZ1HgAfSLIrL9w/VirgxkvaUl+5eElQZbvv31Y7Txgskty4d0op wlHbWg6acwEww== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 09:38:24 +0000 From: linuxgpletc@redchan.it To: editor@lulz.com, editor@lwn.net, news@theregister.co.uk Cc: misc@openbsd.org, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: Author of GPC-Slots2 promises to sue "John Doe" who violated GPL recission. (update 3) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Sender: linuxgpletc@redchan.it User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Some updates (3): http://8ch.net/tech/res/1018729.html Anonymous 01/29/19 (Tue) 09:23:25 No.1024608 >> 1024606 https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech8.html#x11-540007.4 Sorry lad. Anonymous 01/29/19 (Tue) 09:25:16 No.1024609 >> 1024604 > Cites previously anonomyous paralegal woman from online rag > Ignores published lawyers who are men (Paralegal woman stopped talking after she would outed) Anonymous 01/29/19 (Tue) 09:27:15 No.1024610 >> 1024608 Sorry, they published that "clarification" after I raised the issue, and their "clarification" is bullshit. Guess what: The FSF doesn't make the law. Quick rundown: Section 4 of the GPLv2 states "parties who have received..." The "you" here is the licensee, it is not the grantor (See Section 0 of the GPLv2 "Each licensee is addressed as "you". "). It is not applicable against the grantor of the license: it is a rule the licensee has to abide by, set by the grantor, in-order to have permission to modify or create derivative works at all. About the printer driver case: The contract in that case is the preliminary writing, the offer to do business ("pay us, or alternatively follow the GPL"). The acceptance of that contract by following the terms of that preliminary writing (choosing the GPL instead of paying). That is why both contract and damages under copyright are available. Damages for the contract portion ("pay us"), or damages for violating the GPL license. The parties later settled out of court. The key is that the businesses offer created two alternative means of acceptance of it's offer to do business: pay for the commercial license, or follow the GPL. So the court allowed the biz to recover the lost profit. Anonymous 01/29/19 (Tue) 09:29:15 No.1024612 >> 1024608 Sorry, read a book *, not a publication by interested parties that was debunked 5 hours after it was published. https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/26/420 * https://www.amazon.com/Open-Source-Licensing-Software-Intellectual/dp/0131487876 Anonymous 01/29/19 (Tue) 09:34:06 No.1024614 >> 1024604 >> 1024608 Cites idiot self-sure* paralegal woman who doesn't know her ass from her elbow, and who went silent after she was outed, plus a publication from an interested party that was immediately debunked. (*is there any other type?) Vs: Cites published lawyers well versed in their field. Explains why interested party's publication is bullshit immediately once aware of the fraudulent advice. Anonymous 01/29/19 (Tue) 09:36:24 No.1024615 Notice no response to >>1024602 Just a change of tactics.