lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectGrsecurity GPL Violations: Linus/FSF/SFConservancy won't defend. Claw back your copyrights. BSD-in-Practice was not the deal.
Silence is consent.

> Are there FOSS developers making decent money via Patreon, GoFundMe,
> whatever?

Yes, Grsecurity is making good money.
They simply added a no-redistribution agreement to their patch of the
Linux Kernel.
> (
> https://perens.com/2017/06/28/warning-grsecurity-potential-contributory-infringement-risk-for-customers/
> )


The FSF, Software Freedom Conservancy, and the Corporate Linux Kernel
Developers all agree that this is fine (silence is consent).

> https://twitter.com/spendergrsec/status/1293155787859206146
> Importantly, neither the FSF nor the SFC, nor in fact any actual lawyer
> agrees with this bizarre claim from an anonymous troll. More info about
> the source of the claim can be found here:
> https://grsecurity.net/setting_the_record_straight_on_oss_v_perens_part1
> Thanks for doing your part, "Dr" to continue the troll's harrassment

>> LOL. " #GRSecurity violates both the Linux kernel's copyright and the
>> #GCC #copyright by forbidding redistribution of the patches (in their
>> Access Agreement): which are non-seperable derivative works...


Contributors should blanket-revoke their contributions from all
free-takers since they didn't agree to BSD-in-Practice. They should also
claw-back any transferred copyrights from the FSF using the 30 year
clawback provision in the US Copyright Act. Design of how a program
works is a copyrightable aspect (Ex: How RMS designed GCC 30 years ago
or so etc)

Had to repost this because the linux admins deleted the email:


> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/12/28/2518
> The message you requested cannot be found.
> The message you requested cannot be found. The message with the url
> http://feisty.lkml.org/lkml/2020/12/28/2518 does not exist in the
> database.

Grsecurity GPL Violations: Bring a CASE act claim every time GrSecurity
releases a new infringing work?

(GRSecurity blatantly violates the clause in the Linux kernel and
GCC copyright licenses regarding adding addtional terms between the
licensee of the kernel / gcc and furthur down-the-line licensees,
regarding derivative works)
(The linux kernel has 1000s of copyright holders)
(All who shake at the knees at the thought of initiating a federal
Copyright lawsuit)

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-01-09 13:32    [W:0.036 / U:1.392 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site