Linux GPL becomes unenforcable?

[Matthias Urlichs]

Yesterday I chatted with a lawyer friend of mine, prompted by blog posts like
http://www.elpauer.org/?p=1146 .

Basically, she said that it's becoming more and more likely that the kernel GPL
will not be enforceable in the not-too-distant-future, simply because nobody is
doing it right now.

Disclaimer: He was not on retainer, at least not by me, so this should not be
construed as a legal fact. (But she convinced me.)

So what to do? Do we just admit defeat? Or will a few of the major contributors
allow the SFLC <http://www.softwarefreedom.org> to intercede?

Personally I'm very unhappy that [censored] companies like Sony try to prevent
my burning a copy of their DVD -- there's no other way to skip the eternity of
unrelated bulls*it -- yet they openly solicit co-authors for a Busybox
replacement. Because *that* copyleft *is* enforced.

Sorry, but I want our kernel to stay free. And I want that kind of double
standard to stop.

I'm going to contact them today, but the one module I wrote isn't likely to be
included in any of these devices. So would a couple of people whose contribution
*is* relevant please step forward?

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/