Hello Bradley,

On 10/9/2013 at 10:28 PM, "Bradley M. Kuhn" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>This list is a very useful resource for us to discuss GPL 
>violations
>where the companies aren't acting properly.  However, I'd like 
>restate
>advice I've been giving for years now: contacting a company 
>privately
>regarding GPL compliance issues is always the best first step.  It 
>seems
>that most on this list *aren't* doing that.  Please, don't play 
>"gotcha"
>over GPL violations; it makes it *harder* for those of us who 
>enforce
>the GPL, not easier.
>
>This is a point I've often made in my 15 years of GPL enforcement 
>work, but
>it bears repeating often, because so often, people want to "go 
>public"
>quickly, which just isn't the most productive way to work on GPL 
>enforcement.
>
>I've written blogs about this issue in the past, FWIW:
>  http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2009/11/08/gpl-enforcement.html
>  http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2012/09/17/gpl-compliance.html
>
>The most salient quote on this point is what I wrote on 2009-11-08:
>
>   Don't go public first. Back around late 1999, when I found my 
>first GPL
>   violation from scratch, I wanted to post it to every mailing 
>list I could
>   find and shame that company that failed to respect and 
>cooperate with the
>   software freedom community. I'm glad that I didn't do that, 
>because I've
>   since seen similar actions destroy the lines of communication 
>with
>   violators, and make resolution tougher. Indeed, I believe that 
>if the
>   Cisco/Linksys violations had not been a center of public 
>ridicule in 2003
>   when I (then at the FSF) was in the midst of negotiating with 
>them for
>   compliance, we would not have ended up with such a long saga to
>   resolution.

Good point. I raised this because I couldn't find the right channel to get
a hold of who was responsible for this, especially because the IRC channel
for the Chromium team didn't give useful pointers from a try and this also
was my first analysis of mixed code that had closed source and open source
code in the same binary.

Thanks for pointing this out.

Best regards


Reply via email to