Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 12:12 AM NeilBrown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25 2018, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > Theodore Y. Ts'o :
> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 03:39:01PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> >> > Under Jacobsen vs. Katzer (535 f 3d 1373 fed cir 2008) authors of
> >> > GPLed software have a specific right to relief (including injunctive
> >> > relief) against misappropriation of their software. That ruling (which
> >> > was the case of first impression on the binding status of the GPL)
> >> > reputational damage is *specifically* recognized as grounds for relief.
> >>
> >> I've read the legal briefs, and I'm pretty sure they don't say what
> >> you are claiming they say. Yes, I'm not a lawyer --- but that's OK
> >> --- neither are you.
> >
> > How much are you willing to gamble on not being wrong?
> >
> >> The *vast* majority of the "anti-CoC dissidents" who have been
> >> advancing this argument, have, as near as I can tell, little or no
> >> copyright ownership in the kernel.
> >
> > I do not have any facts with which to dispute this specific claim.
> > However, I do notice that a significant number of long-time
> > contributors have put themselves in the anti-CoC camp. I note Al Viro
> > as a recent example.
>
> I think you are blurring two groups here.
> Ted describes "anti-CoC dissidents" as people who are advancing an
> argument about rescinding their license. This is a smaller groups than
> the "ant-CoC camp" who don't really like the CoC. I suspect is it is a
> much smaller group when restricting to actual copyright holders.
>
> I am against the CoC as it stands, but rescinding any license is such an
> enormous over-reaction, I find the concept laughable.
Indeed. While I cannot comment on the legality of the rescinding, this
rescinding is definitely not compatible with "be nice to each other",
which is what all kernel developers who do not like the CoC as it
stands, and who I'm aware of, do like as a general principle.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 12:12 AM NeilBrown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25 2018, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > Theodore Y. Ts'o :
> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 03:39:01PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> >> > Under Jacobsen vs. Katzer (535 f 3d 1373 fed cir 2008) authors of
> >> > GPLed software have a specific right to relief (including injunctive
> >> > relief) against misappropriation of their software. That ruling (which
> >> > was the case of first impression on the binding status of the GPL)
> >> > reputational damage is *specifically* recognized as grounds for relief.
> >>
> >> I've read the legal briefs, and I'm pretty sure they don't say what
> >> you are claiming they say. Yes, I'm not a lawyer --- but that's OK
> >> --- neither are you.
> >
> > How much are you willing to gamble on not being wrong?
> >
> >> The *vast* majority of the "anti-CoC dissidents" who have been
> >> advancing this argument, have, as near as I can tell, little or no
> >> copyright ownership in the kernel.
> >
> > I do not have any facts with which to dispute this specific claim.
> > However, I do notice that a significant number of long-time
> > contributors have put themselves in the anti-CoC camp. I note Al Viro
> > as a recent example.
>
> I think you are blurring two groups here.
> Ted describes "anti-CoC dissidents" as people who are advancing an
> argument about rescinding their license. This is a smaller groups than
> the "ant-CoC camp" who don't really like the CoC. I suspect is it is a
> much smaller group when restricting to actual copyright holders.
>
> I am against the CoC as it stands, but rescinding any license is such an
> enormous over-reaction, I find the concept laughable.
Indeed. While I cannot comment on the legality of the rescinding, this
rescinding is definitely not compatible with "be nice to each other",
which is what all kernel developers who do not like the CoC as it
stands, and who I'm aware of, do like as a general principle.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Sun, Oct 28 2018, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Sat, 27 Oct 2018, tim.b...@sony.com wrote: > >> Al, >> >> Can you please, even in the face of comments you find irritating, keep >> your responses more civil? Calling someone a "wankstain" is >> unprofessional > > Tim, > > to be completely honest, communicating anonymously doesn't really match my > "this is highly professional" standards either, so I don't think we should > be losing too much sleep over this particular e-mail exchange. I agree with Tim here. It doesn't really matter who (or what) you are talking to, what matters is the context in which you are talking. We seem to be trying to raise the standard of communication within the kernel community. That means all communication. > > CoC explicitly requires us to be reasonably nice to the human being on the > other end of the wire, which I whole-heartedly believe is a very noble and > nice goal. But you really have to know at least a little bit who's there > on the other end. Otherwise failure to communicate might be sort of > inevitable. As you know, I think the CoC is a mistake and should be removed. But seeing you to play that game: 1/ code-of-conduct.rst doesn't contain the word "human" at all 2/ code-of-conduect-interpretation.rst explicitly says We know everyone is human which could be read as implying that you need to treat the other person as human, even if they don't act that way. Do you *really* want to use the CoC to support your position? Thanks, NeilBrown > > -- > Jiri Kosina > SUSE Labs signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Sun, Oct 28 2018, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Sat, 27 Oct 2018, tim.b...@sony.com wrote: > >> Al, >> >> Can you please, even in the face of comments you find irritating, keep >> your responses more civil? Calling someone a "wankstain" is >> unprofessional > > Tim, > > to be completely honest, communicating anonymously doesn't really match my > "this is highly professional" standards either, so I don't think we should > be losing too much sleep over this particular e-mail exchange. I agree with Tim here. It doesn't really matter who (or what) you are talking to, what matters is the context in which you are talking. We seem to be trying to raise the standard of communication within the kernel community. That means all communication. > > CoC explicitly requires us to be reasonably nice to the human being on the > other end of the wire, which I whole-heartedly believe is a very noble and > nice goal. But you really have to know at least a little bit who's there > on the other end. Otherwise failure to communicate might be sort of > inevitable. As you know, I think the CoC is a mistake and should be removed. But seeing you to play that game: 1/ code-of-conduct.rst doesn't contain the word "human" at all 2/ code-of-conduect-interpretation.rst explicitly says We know everyone is human which could be read as implying that you need to treat the other person as human, even if they don't act that way. Do you *really* want to use the CoC to support your position? Thanks, NeilBrown > > -- > Jiri Kosina > SUSE Labs signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 03:46:02PM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote: > The anonymous person is generally thought to have appeared on the net > previously as MikeeUSA. That entity has a well-recorded history of misogyny > and other anti-social behaviour. You are misreading it - behaviour of that... member of our biological species is entirely controlled by its desperate need to be noticed, no matter what. Pathetic, but that's the social shmedia generation for you... I wouldn't be surprised if s/h/it maintains a sock puppet or two in the other bunch of PETA-level wankers^W^W^W^Wculture warriors, BTW.
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 03:46:02PM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote: > The anonymous person is generally thought to have appeared on the net > previously as MikeeUSA. That entity has a well-recorded history of misogyny > and other anti-social behaviour. You are misreading it - behaviour of that... member of our biological species is entirely controlled by its desperate need to be noticed, no matter what. Pathetic, but that's the social shmedia generation for you... I wouldn't be surprised if s/h/it maintains a sock puppet or two in the other bunch of PETA-level wankers^W^W^W^Wculture warriors, BTW.
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
Bruce Perens : > The anonymous person is generally thought to have appeared on the net > previously as MikeeUSA. That entity has a well-recorded history of misogyny > and other anti-social behaviour. He's also complained to me recently that > because of "people like me", the law prohibits him from marrying very young > women. I mean single-digit young. Although he is not at all meritorious of > your civil behavior, you may not wish to lower yourself to his level. I strongly doubt it. I've had my own run-in with MikeeUSA; I remember it vividly and unpleasantly. The prose style doesn't match. MikeeUSA could barely maintain coherent communication; this guy is using language that indicates he's at least several degrees brighter. -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/;>Eric S. Raymond My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
Bruce Perens : > The anonymous person is generally thought to have appeared on the net > previously as MikeeUSA. That entity has a well-recorded history of misogyny > and other anti-social behaviour. He's also complained to me recently that > because of "people like me", the law prohibits him from marrying very young > women. I mean single-digit young. Although he is not at all meritorious of > your civil behavior, you may not wish to lower yourself to his level. I strongly doubt it. I've had my own run-in with MikeeUSA; I remember it vividly and unpleasantly. The prose style doesn't match. MikeeUSA could barely maintain coherent communication; this guy is using language that indicates he's at least several degrees brighter. -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/;>Eric S. Raymond My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018, tim.b...@sony.com wrote: > Al, > > Can you please, even in the face of comments you find irritating, keep > your responses more civil? Calling someone a "wankstain" is > unprofessional Tim, to be completely honest, communicating anonymously doesn't really match my "this is highly professional" standards either, so I don't think we should be losing too much sleep over this particular e-mail exchange. CoC explicitly requires us to be reasonably nice to the human being on the other end of the wire, which I whole-heartedly believe is a very noble and nice goal. But you really have to know at least a little bit who's there on the other end. Otherwise failure to communicate might be sort of inevitable. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
Re: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018, tim.b...@sony.com wrote: > Al, > > Can you please, even in the face of comments you find irritating, keep > your responses more civil? Calling someone a "wankstain" is > unprofessional Tim, to be completely honest, communicating anonymously doesn't really match my "this is highly professional" standards either, so I don't think we should be losing too much sleep over this particular e-mail exchange. CoC explicitly requires us to be reasonably nice to the human being on the other end of the wire, which I whole-heartedly believe is a very noble and nice goal. But you really have to know at least a little bit who's there on the other end. Otherwise failure to communicate might be sort of inevitable. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
RE: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
> -Original Message- > From: Al Viro > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 06:52:44AM +, visionsofal...@redchan.it wrote: > > Al: the FSF was so insistent on the adoption of the GPL version 3 > > because the GPL version 2 is not operative against the grantor. > > Anonymous wankstain: sod off and learn to troll properly. It *is* an art > form, and the one you are clearly not up to. > > D-. For the effort and successful use of spellchecker. The style and > contents are about F to E-, unfortunately, so take that in the spirit > in which it is offered. As a participation award, that is. Al, Can you please, even in the face of comments you find irritating, keep your responses more civil? Calling someone a "wankstain" is unprofessional, and we're trying to raise the level of discourse here. > > *plonk* I think this part of the response was sufficient to communicate that you do not take the suggestions of the other party seriously. And it communicates to others the right approach. If someone thinks that another person is acting in bad faith, I think it's better to just stop listening to that person, and let that person know it, and to let other community members know it. De-escalation is preferable to engagement when working with someone who is acting in bad faith. Although I disagree with the approach used in the top portion of this message, I am grateful that you are committed to protecting Linux and our development community. Regards, -- Tim
RE: [Ksummit-discuss] The linux devs can rescind their license grant.
> -Original Message- > From: Al Viro > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 06:52:44AM +, visionsofal...@redchan.it wrote: > > Al: the FSF was so insistent on the adoption of the GPL version 3 > > because the GPL version 2 is not operative against the grantor. > > Anonymous wankstain: sod off and learn to troll properly. It *is* an art > form, and the one you are clearly not up to. > > D-. For the effort and successful use of spellchecker. The style and > contents are about F to E-, unfortunately, so take that in the spirit > in which it is offered. As a participation award, that is. Al, Can you please, even in the face of comments you find irritating, keep your responses more civil? Calling someone a "wankstain" is unprofessional, and we're trying to raise the level of discourse here. > > *plonk* I think this part of the response was sufficient to communicate that you do not take the suggestions of the other party seriously. And it communicates to others the right approach. If someone thinks that another person is acting in bad faith, I think it's better to just stop listening to that person, and let that person know it, and to let other community members know it. De-escalation is preferable to engagement when working with someone who is acting in bad faith. Although I disagree with the approach used in the top portion of this message, I am grateful that you are committed to protecting Linux and our development community. Regards, -- Tim
