The copyright to the linux kernel is being violated by GRSecurity, why is this OK?

From: aconcernedfossdev
Date: Thu Jun 15 2017 - 11:17:22 EST


The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the imposition of additional terms.
The making of an understanding that the derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is the imposition of an additional term.
The communication of this threat is the moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant.
Thence-forth modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is a violation of the Copyright statute.
The concoction of the transparent scheme shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge by GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.


(Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch, they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works, GRSecurity does.).