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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS 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 89EF4C43387 for ; Tue, 1 Jan 2019 20:16:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54B1121019 for ; Tue, 1 Jan 2019 20:16:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=memeware.net header.i=@memeware.net header.b="t+LGHX3l" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726606AbfAAUQV (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jan 2019 15:16:21 -0500 Received: from cock.li ([185.100.85.212]:44220 "EHLO cock.li" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725908AbfAAUQU (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jan 2019 15:16:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=memeware.net; s=mail; t=1546373777; bh=zaJQ2FgZ8mqejKJ/tuvAYL9DELeGKI2UKSMIpxVia0Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=t+LGHX3lgmCqpJ+/W8TUnqjq32aeNIhEPw36F8IV5ktf59dJyYnzInwXDd0isW7w9 XKakBkAaK6RmT/S7om1NdUn78dzJxBf9ESv8zDQHahC/WgwnhVArJVYlOJAgouI7wZ y8RHNy9m7MdVcFjPiUfsmt/FDODYyqej8hgoIMiGclrXdFjEw4a7omXlZGm9y5pXNr ER24cDY0N0P+VHJWddYpPkmMRZzQ+u9oVRwi3tgLuCte1NGxxWK2vB338mWNiM8T4M 5cHkjLUszuldEovUJf37tKGPc8llsk9tSyoIGPdvN83baau/WH/arG4CnvhAWVf3+K RwkfGSIwZHwgA== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2019 20:16:16 +0000 From: vsnsdualce@memeware.net To: william@techservsys.com, "Ubuntu user technical support, not for general discussions" Cc: misc@openbsd.org, gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: CoC loving Linux programmers swear the GPLv2 is irrevocable. They are wrong. (As are the women they wish to empower). In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <604e57a471c4ce5ecca308125e9bb25b@memeware.net> X-Sender: vsnsdualce@memeware.net 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 What promise did you rely upon? It is the right of the property owner to revoke. You payed the property owner (Linux Programmer 721) nothing for his code. He never promised you that he would forgo his right to revoke (Read the GPLv2, there is no mention of not revoking the license. Something which the GPLv3 adds). (The SFConservancy's artistic interpretations were debunked 5 hours after publication) Additionally you did not pay the LICENSOR for this forbearance. It is not reasonable for you to rely on a promise that was never made, and a promise that you never payed the owner for. In short: you are wrong, and you and others are attempting to convert the property of the copyright owners to your own property, essentially. (Your claim is that another's property can be taken from him because to do otherwise would be inconvenient to the people that are committed to committing the taking.) On 2019-01-01 12:42, william drescher wrote: > "Consideration" can be in form of " > detrimental reliance." That means that you relied on the license and > that reliance cost you something. > > So if you spend money to pay programmers or if you spend time writing > programs based on the license you have paid for the license.