I have a law license, I don't need to read about who has standing to
sue, and how to do so (Copyright Litigation (COPYLITG on Westlaw) is
good enough for that).
I want to know why you guys (Fsf for the GCC plugins, and various kernel
copyright holders for the kernel patch) will not sue GrSecurity, and why
there is no discussion.
You just won't discuss this blatant foundational violation.
Why has my post been spam filtered/black holed.
On 2019-11-01 07:02, Jean Louis wrote:
* [email protected] <[email protected]> [2019-11-01 00:03]:
I tried to send this to the list, but it was dropped as spam, which is
no
surprise since the some want to screen communications to RMS and thus
control him.
... cut...
Wouldn't the FSF have standing regarding the GCC plugins atleast?
Couldn't you all rally linux-kernel copyright holders to bring a joint
action?
References:
perens.com/2017/06/28/warning-grsecurity-potential-contributory-infringement-risk-for-customers/
perens.com/static/OSS_Spenger_v_Perens/0_2018cv15189/docs1/pdf/18.pdf
(Page 10 onward of this brief gives a good recitation of the facts and
issues
Recommended reads:
Enforcing the GNU GPL by Eben Moglen
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html
and
The Principles of Community-Oriented GPL Enforcement by Joshua Gay
https://www.fsf.org/licensing/enforcement-principles
Jean
