Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262280AbTINDJJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:09:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262282AbTINDJI (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:09:08 -0400 Received: from astound-64-85-224-253.ca.astound.net ([64.85.224.253]:21003 "EHLO master.linux-ide.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262280AbTINDJF (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:09:05 -0400 Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:51:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Andre Hedrick To: Erik Andersen cc: Timothy Miller , David Schwartz , Pascal Schmidt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model] In-Reply-To: <20030914015719.GA16947@codepoet.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2542 Lines: 67 Erik: One more thing you forgot! Before you run around ranting about DMCA and CPRM and making suttle legal threats. Everyone here knows who put it on the line to gain control of technology to prevent Content Protection Recordable Media from covering the storage industry wide. That is correct it was me. I was the one and only person ever to stand up and have a position to help everyone here to take control of technology. While all of my hard work was destroyed by the brain-dead of the EFF by causing it to go underground. So lets be real clear about your wild swings of DMCA, because the irony will be back to haunt. Threaten to strike me down with DMCA, what a child you have become. So this is where it goes ... Mighty Linux kills usage for business with lawsuits like the MPAA and RIAA. GPL == DMCA, this is the brush you swing paint well dude. Cheers, Andre Hedrick LAD Storage Consulting Group On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Erik Andersen wrote: > On Fri Sep 12, 2003 at 04:58:03PM -0400, Timothy Miller wrote: > > > > > > David Schwartz wrote: > > > > > However, some people seem to be arguing that the GPL_ONLY symbols > > > are in > > >fact a license enforcement technique. If that's true, then when they > > >distribute their code, they are putting additional restrictions not in the > > >GPL on it. That is a GPL violation. > > > > Agreed. GPL_ONLY is not a license restriction. It is a technical issue. > > I'll go even farther, and say that one might call the GPL_ONLY > symbols an "effective technological measure" that "effectively > controls access to a work" and "effectively protects a right of a > copyright owner ... in the ordinary course of its operation....". > Bypassing GPL_ONLY symbols, as recently advocated by David > Schwartz and Andre Hedrick, could be considered circumvention of > an effective technological measure. Remember Dmitry Sklyarov, > > -Erik > > -- > Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/ > --This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons-- > - > 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/ > - 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/