Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755421Ab2KNHD2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2012 02:03:28 -0500 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:56012 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754789Ab2KNHDY (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2012 02:03:24 -0500 Message-ID: <1352860374.28921.3.camel@dabdike> Subject: Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation From: James Bottomley To: Alan Cox Cc: "Bradley M. Kuhn" , "Theodore Ts'o" , Andy Grover , "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , target-devel , linux-scsi , linux-kernel , Marc Fleischmann , Nicholas Bellinger In-Reply-To: <20121111183243.62602d9b@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> References: <509A915B.30105@redhat.com> <1352626456.6524.46.camel@dabdike> <20121111130553.GA30943@thunk.org> <87390gxjbd.fsf@ebb.org> <1352658157.6524.58.camel@dabdike> <20121111183243.62602d9b@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:32:54 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1620 Lines: 37 On Sun, 2012-11-11 at 18:32 +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > 1. Yes, I've got first hand proof of a GPL violation (in which case > > > we'll then move to seeing how we can remedy this) or > > > 2. A genuine public apology for the libel, which I'll do my best to > > > prevail on RTS to accept. > > > > > > Because any further discussion of unsubstantiated allegations of this > > > nature exposes us all to jeopardy of legal sanction. > > > > That asks for moderation until we have a better investigation of the > > facts. It definitely doesn't try to prejudge them or express preference > > for a specific outcome as your misquote makes out. > > So how can you demand a public apology for libel or instant first hand > proof and now claim you just wanted moderation ? It's not hard to see why > your position was misinterpreted ? So you want me to be less definite to avoid misinterpretation? OK, here it is: I'd really appreciate it if there was more rigour behind the initial investigation before going public with suspicions of GPL violation. Based on what I read on the internet is a bit too low a bar for me, particularly when, I believe, Red Hat has the proprietary target OS and can check directly. We now have a whole runaway train of suspicion and lawyer involvement before anyone has actually confirmed there is a problem. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/