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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED 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 826ABC004C9 for ; Sun, 5 May 2019 05:00:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B008920675 for ; Sun, 5 May 2019 05:00:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redchan.it header.i=@redchan.it header.b="ZkM7nTTL" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726636AbfEEFAH (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 May 2019 01:00:07 -0400 Received: from mx1.cock.li ([185.10.68.5]:60651 "EHLO cock.li" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725814AbfEEFAH (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 May 2019 01:00:07 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 527 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sun, 05 May 2019 01:00:05 EDT MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=redchan.it; s=mail; t=1557031875; bh=I2FCNmKK327bFSGvkmTu/8fw2JSN3TtQWsMD6AuP8w0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From; b=ZkM7nTTLiE2shejN5xCCMnCuCC3XaQ5JGBDl9ju9ynAnsCYHLtc+eV2ORRJ11ksXm 9IQ/hJfxrpZzjx3X5cXqJqXx1DaCuxeEpQHRcemqV/FipOX+YFP88QM8rLv1fGvhfj rRgJhDIwkUV9m2fRjpP5juUm/DHl87njhsUaInIEOf4eB5ovWlEL8rXq5hXXS7uc+X ZZl7HDPFgi930bAo5+9q+EUBR1SOuWjazFUJjj7SWR+u60/aYtc9xFkunlagwPorqc L95oW27MZjVCsEniJ7cKlT0nEN5hSyFlfIWYZ4X9rDtDpP6lYlTh4i/gbG7lGxd1iZ hplrntcj/ztpQ== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 05 May 2019 04:51:15 +0000 From: vsnsdualce2@redchan.it To: rhkramer@gmail.com Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ivan Ivanov , mailinglists@mattcrews.com, jhasler@newsguy.com, scdbackup@gmx.net, richard@walnut.gen.nz, curty@free.fr, jmtd@debian.org, mick.crane@gmail.com, tomas@tuxteam.de, steve@einval.com, joe@jretrading.com, rms@gnu.org, esr@thyrsus.com Subject: Re: Can a recipients rights under GNU GPL be revoked? - Bradley M. Kuhn is not an attorney (he should go get his JD and get licensed). Message-ID: <60c1b08305c5326e3503f51d81622541@redchan.it> X-Sender: vsnsdualce2@redchan.it 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 > of the GPL. (And Bradley Kuhn is a lawyer -- my older mind can't > remember if > he was the lawyer who argued (and lost) a previous free software case > (don't > remember the details) in front of the US Supreme Court. (Sometimes > referred rhkramer@gmail.com: Bradley M. Kuhn is not an attorney, which is why he had to step down as head of his organization and hire a lawyer to head the organization in his place: Bar rules do not allow lawyers to serve under a non-lawyer in an organization, and the organization was essentially a pro-bono law firm (which really needed a attorney in it's ranks...) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_M._Kuhn Yes the "oh I just stepped down because we need a woman to head this organization now" claim he makes is, in fact, disingenuous. What they needed is a lawyer in the organization: and the lawyer could not be directed by non-lawyers. http://ebb.org/bkuhn/ > Kuhn holds a summa cum laude B.S. in Computer Science from Loyola > University in Maryland, and an M.S. in Computer Science from the > University of Cincinnati. http://ebb.org/bkuhn/resume/ No J.D., No law license. I have both. I don't want to drag someone down, but I had to correct your mistake. Once he applies to law school, gets his degree, and later his license I'm sure he will correct his as well. On 2019-01-28 00:35, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, January 27, 2019 07:24:17 PM rhkramer@gmail.com wrote: >> Resending to the list -- I didn't notice that Ivan had sent this to me >> only, and my reply, of course, then went to him only. >> >> On Sunday, January 27, 2019 10:06:46 AM Ivan Ivanov wrote: >> > Yes: The linux devs can rescind their license grant. GPLv2 is a bare >> > license and is revocable by the grantor. Search for "vsnsdualce" "gpl" >> > online to find his messages which prove that, he is a lawyer and has >> > investigated this subject very well. I am CC'ing him in case you'd >> > like to request more information. So if you didn't like the Code of >> > Conduct covertly accepted behind the scenes against your will, and >> > maybe some other questionable political decisions in technical >> > projects > > ... > >> I *might* go read some of the stuff by vsnsdualce, but the Weboob >> situation >> is not an example of a (free or GPL) license being rescinded. (You >> didn't >> quite say it was, but one could infer that is what you are trying to >> say >> by its inclusion in the same paragraph.) > > Ok, I went and read a few things by "vsnsdualce" re the GPL, in > particular: > > http://readlist.com/lists/gentoo.org/gentoo-user/42/213256.html > > And from that, I went to: > > https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech8.html#x11-540007.4 > > It seems clear that this is one of those things that I talked about in > my > previous last paragraph (the aside, still quoted below) -- vsnsdualce > is > stating his opinion / taking a position that is in opposition to the > postions > / opinions of other lawyers. > > I don't know how far he is willing to go to try to confirm his > position, but > until a court case or something similar (and probably appeals) decides > the > issue, there are two opinions. > > If I had to guess / be which would prevail, I would bet on the side of > copyleft.org who, in a way are the successors (mcow) to the original > author(s) > of the GPL. (And Bradley Kuhn is a lawyer -- my older mind can't > remember if > he was the lawyer who argued (and lost) a previous free software case > (don't > remember the details) in front of the US Supreme Court. (Sometimes > referred > to as "the supremes", but they don't really sing that well (well, to be > fair, > I guess I never heard them sing ;-) > > Even if he was the guy that lost that case (I'm fairly sure it was > someone > else), he is certainly a very experienced lawyer, and very familiar > with the > issues around this license. I would trust his opinion more that I > would > "vsnsdualce"'s. > > ... > >> >> Just another aside: One of my takes on lawyers is that they interpret >> laws >> and take legal positions for various reasons, often to further their >> own >> or their client's interests, and then are willing to fight the legal >> battle that may ensue. A lawyer expressing an opinion does not make >> that >> opinion correct / legal.