Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755986Ab3JOHsw (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 03:48:52 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f65.google.com ([209.85.215.65]:52277 "EHLO mail-la0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752224Ab3JOHsv (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 03:48:51 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20131013120201.GA23970@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:48:49 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Transcend's "one of the most cavalier GPL violations in a long time" From: Mats Liljegren To: Rogelio Serrano Cc: Pavel Machek , "luke.leighton" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1179 Lines: 24 > I was led to believe this in the busybox list. maybe we are communally > smoking the same stuff. Linux Kernel Developers would rather go on > developing better code than waste time on enforcement. Some even think > it is counter productive to adoption of linux. > > Transcend most likely knows this. > > You have a piece of code under the GPL and the majority of the > copyright holders say they will not enforce it. Thats virtually public > domain code. Thats why i stopped contributing to the linux kernel and > opted to maintain a massive patch instead. I think it is sad that you take this decision purely based on the fact that by contributing to the Linux kernel you will not get help to enforce the GPL license for your code. I'm a little bit curious however: In what way do you now have better ways to enforce the GPL license of your code now that you maintain a massive patch? Is it that you never show it to the public? -- 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/