SF Conservancy Speaks Out Against Developer Doing GPL Enforcement For Financial Gain

[chithanh]

Ah, ok, so you say he let the company use the GPLed software infringing the GPL after he got paid off?
I'd say that is very similar to stealing shit he does not own as most of the code in that project was not his, but I see what you mean now, thanks.

Not quite, the court awarded compensation is only for past infringement. If the company continues to violate the GPL, they will have to continue to pay.

And he is not stealing anything, every other rights holder can take the same action and extract money from the infringing company if they wish.

[duby229]

The Vietnam war is actually the perfect counterargument. Militarily speaking we won the Vietnam War multiple times over, the problem is that the US military wasn't given the authority to actually end it once we pushed the Vietcong out of Vietnam as doing so would have invaded one of China's border nations, because of fear of Chinese reprisal as in what happened in the Korean war. If the US Military had been allowed to go all in however the Vietcong would have been completely annihilated. Instead what happened is the US Military won, the Vietcong would declare peace talks, and during those talks build up forces along the border, make a decent push into Vietnam before being pushed back out, eventually The Media made enough noise about it that the American public got fed up with The Vietnam War and we withdrew, leaving the French controlled government in place which the Vietcong didn't even have the courtesy to wait until the last of our forces had pulled out before toppling.

Actually the current Iraq and Afghanistan wars are another great example against Guerilla tactics vs the US Military, going by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ualties_of_war we average roughly 2 deaths/day against forces that are slightly better armed than the American public would be, which is the lowest rate of a major conflict that we've been in, it's also a fairly irrelevant amount in your "war of attrition", just for comparison car crashes kill roughly 90 people/day in the US (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year) , and heart disease kills ~ 1671 People / day (http://www.cdc.gov/heartdisease/facts.htm).

That said, if we're actually being realistic as opposed to asinine, a "People's Revolt" is incredibly unlikely to be what would happen as opposed to a State Revolt, with states choosing to exit The Union, which would mean a proper military conflict as opposed to a Guerilla War. It's very important to remember that the US is not a country but a Federation of Nation States, much like the EU, and so any grievance against the Federal Government that The People have is usually going to be a grievance of The States against The Federation, any People's Revolt on the other hand is going to be by The People against The State, which thus far is really more Militant Faction X against The State.

While I really appreciate your reply because it's so well thought out, still disagree with the concept you are trying to portray.

The only way I can explain it to a person of you level of intelligence is to describe my own experiences in this country. In my hometown we've had political corruption scandals, public school funding frauds, gang war violence instigated by the police. See we Americans see the US government for what it really is. Let me just post a youtube video for you to ponder. https://www.google.com/search?q=yout...utf-8&oe=utf-8 Think about the situation portrayed there. After the state gets defeated it becomes a federal war. At which point you would see americans and mexicans rally together like never before.

It comes down to whether you believe American citizens can defeat the state, in which case I say to you absolutely yes. Americans have been at cold war with the state for a long time. I don't mean to underestimate demography, I know i am, but hear me out and consider what I said. Too many Americans would die either way.

[starshipeleven]

Not quite, the court awarded compensation is only for past infringement. If the company continues to violate the GPL, they will have to continue to pay.

And he is not stealing anything, every other rights holder can take the same action and extract money from the infringing company if they wish.

Not according to law of course, but yeah, he is.
If he is just getting paid for GPL copyright infringement without asking the company to stop using such code, it's not what the GPL was about. GPL was about not letting companies steal opensource code, not about getting paid for its infringement.

[chithanh]

You can read what RMS wrote about selling exceptions to the GPL. He thinks it is ok as long as all code is available under GPL (ie. no proprietary "pro" versions or extensions).

https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/selling-exceptions

[starshipeleven]

You can read what RMS wrote about selling exceptions to the GPL. He thinks it is ok as long as all code is available under GPL (ie. no proprietary "pro" versions or extensions).
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/selling-exceptions

He cannot sell GPL exceptions to code he did not write. The company isn't using only the code he wrote, but the whole project. Which is why I said that analogy is bs.

[Luke_Wolf]

While I really appreciate your reply because it's so well thought out, still disagree with the concept you are trying to portray.

The only way I can explain it to a person of you level of intelligence is to describe my own experiences in this country. In my hometown we've had political corruption scandals, public school funding frauds, gang war violence instigated by the police. See we Americans see the US government for what it really is. Let me just post a youtube video for you to ponder. https://www.google.com/search?q=yout...utf-8&oe=utf-8 Think about the situation portrayed there. After the state gets defeated it becomes a federal war. At which point you would see americans and mexicans rally together like never before.

It comes down to whether you believe American citizens can defeat the state, in which case I say to you absolutely yes. Americans have been at cold war with the state for a long time. I don't mean to underestimate demography, I know i am, but hear me out and consider what I said. Too many Americans would die either way.

It's like this duby,

Could one of the Militant Factions overthrow state governments? Absolutely yes.
Could one of the Militant Factions take over the military bases within a state assuming it was their first strike (and thus were caught off guard)? Absolutely yes
Could one of the Militant Factions go to D.C. and kill off every member of the Federal Government? Absolutely yes.

However will this Militant Faction have the support of The People? No,
Furthermore will the Militant Faction survive the response by the US Military and the segment of The People willing to stand up against them? Absolutely not, in the absolute best case they'll be reduced to the situation we had in Iraq where they're more of a constant pest than a serious threat.

However... on the other hand let's consider the situation where The States have some very serious grievances against The Federal Government, and some of them decide to secede. Under this situation you automatically have the support of The People, and it's actually very likely that the seceding states will hold onto the majority of both the military personnel and assets inside their territory due to said support. As a result the situation now becomes incredibly unpredictable and depends upon the standard rules of war.

So in conclusion,
Is it possible for there to be a Second American Revolution (TM)? Yes
Would it be backed by The People? Yes
Would it be carried out by The People using rifles against the Federal Military? No,

Furthermore while Mexican Nationals want the American Southwest to be under Mexico's authority again, you're delusional if you think the actual Americans support that.

[duby229]

It's like this duby,

Could one of the Militant Factions overthrow state governments? Absolutely yes.
Could one of the Militant Factions take over the military bases within a state assuming it was their first strike (and thus were caught off guard)? Absolutely yes
Could one of the Militant Factions go to D.C. and kill off every member of the Federal Government? Absolutely yes.

However will this Militant Faction have the support of The People? No,
Furthermore will the Militant Faction survive the response by the US Military and the segment of The People willing to stand up against them? Absolutely not, in the absolute best case they'll be reduced to the situation we had in Iraq where they're more of a constant pest than a serious threat.

However... on the other hand let's consider the situation where The States have some very serious grievances against The Federal Government, and some of them decide to secede. Under this situation you automatically have the support of The People, and it's actually very likely that the seceding states will hold onto the majority of both the military personnel and assets inside their territory due to said support. As a result the situation now becomes incredibly unpredictable and depends upon the standard rules of war.

So in conclusion,
Is it possible for there to be a Second American Revolution (TM)? Yes
Would it be backed by The People? Yes
Would it be carried out by The People using rifles against the Federal Military? No,

Furthermore while Mexican Nationals want the American Southwest to be under Mexico's authority again, you're delusional if you think the actual Americans support that.

I'll agree with most of that. It's fair enough really. But I think if that critical junction where the federal military begins killing militant US citizens, it would trigger millions of americans to become militant themselves. I don't know very many mexicans personally, but I do know one guy and he came to thsi country because he wanted a better life. He's an illegal immigrant trying to live a decent life. I choose to think most mexicans came here for similar reasons he did. Except for Native Americans all of our ancestors were immigrants, the mexicans here today are raising families as americans. There is nothing wrong with that. And there are millions of them willing to stand and fight too.

EDIT: I believe the solution to illegal immigration is to make all immigration legal. As it should have always been. They are not aliens, they are human people just like us. They didn't land in america from a space ship, Most of them came here on foot under serious duress seeking a better life. Just like our ancestors did.

[chithanh]

He cannot sell GPL exceptions to code he did not write. The company isn't using only the code he wrote, but the whole project. Which is why I said that analogy is bs.

Who sells exceptions to code which they did not write? The court ordered compensation can only be for code that the developer has the copyright for. In this case, it is for the part of the netfilter code that Patrick McHardy wrote. It does not cover the parts which the other developers wrote, which are free to pursue the same action or not.

[starshipeleven]

Who sells exceptions to code which they did not write?

He is not selling exceptions even for his code, so I'm not understanding why are you pulling up that stuff at all.

[chithanh]

Whatever. He receives money in exchange for companies' non-compliance with the GPL with his code. This is ok according to RMS. This is apparently not ok according to the SF Conservancy.