Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f347:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp9474480pxu; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 17:52:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzcOCMvLBtsdidyVcKwGNlf70hxOcC04aFPyTc7tR9Sbl2b+IzXOSiKxAyEZ3c+5KkVyP7m X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:17cb:: with SMTP id s11mr43151148edy.119.1609206756501; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 17:52:36 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1609206756; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=bgh5YUqN3qIu8LMUvbOAagoMdmRkiq5XzYDsNU8OHGFYCeE/dT0CAloHzMSJGFv5vg daXwv/rtekPAeAx3GWfRJjO+PLfzMzHUQ6YQTI5CRJGxA+/FdOqavAUwbzn35Tz3dYlo x3eYu4yiTIdMDsiRzuv//yzViSuo+2eyNYuDBzopUo4iEw5XQGKrr9EPW6WQAxB4knYC xbMMqyAfbvQoNwhHgAkoZ8mocHoAyukLL9b6hUvf9G1swlRAXVpq0Q3TUy9yfmq3f4U8 7uUVkMRryJ86hh9HIxvipGafEbnfwdrs2X8OsPyjO0wznQw6e98Eymbp+7OoaeB1Mxi1 mQNw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :content-transfer-encoding:dkim-signature:mime-version; bh=Cvgckqn7DhtXchPrC7Hasq+jsX/U6//ZdfOKnXKXv/Q=; b=CukUql8FPsI/k9ehYex5xb51P2J64x8OLZKxL3SR42hxcES20C9J0D30F2arM7NbsX bNHjxo8N5hVhNUxj3ib/QKaw4vfuZxLNvHAO3uYFYLlkMZwiDlF2dUV69GtaWspno9c3 Q3M2M7RtmtHReiso7ACH55PybRPuMp2RSznX46Ve6KZgimmifuBv7gg4EjWOKLtr3vla u/m77qxd4UN4WIMBFa/Kr2IBbADbYUPVqw+I6yCBKC6hwoLOegKHb846CB0SFH1qgzpP MagIr3FuyybubezBhhih3AK09aGaYsdSk+1TgQghse5sSEq3J6YfZyt9WWpAgjPtB+qL zINQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@firemail.cc header.s=mail header.b="IMT/Vnid"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id dg17si19942738edb.531.2020.12.28.17.52.14; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 17:52:36 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@firemail.cc header.s=mail header.b="IMT/Vnid"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728729AbgL2BKY (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 28 Dec 2020 20:10:24 -0500 Received: from mail.cock.li ([37.120.193.124]:47320 "EHLO mail.cock.li" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726738AbgL2BKX (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Dec 2020 20:10:23 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 599 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 20:10:23 EST MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=firemail.cc; s=mail; t=1609203578; bh=eCiOQGxiPZJs7rH3GIOjggodNGZ3G2WmQmcJCEW3PTY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From; b=IMT/VnidNmN85gjFnsZ4ribF7showFQ414aH3KX1tmPvA398ULSalEkdGo+aOEO6+ 3vDGeML9s0WyBbWWd0JenZ+mRyg7cFrax3tWnp7GI/xCxX8daN4T9UZe3+02/5gDDs 6yyxreG7cguwqTrcoFMizvBcyqUInAJoBOIVT07v3uvxoBRW6KHAhnLoeU6KIfPbop YRr4LDbQ6nsMTtfocYXTlRksGNHNNAVPuoY7CKiC/Kjz3O3s0flrrTRxh0/0aIgOtP Kk6+lCmpM7B2H2R7Q6LplEfkrF9fdDRrZbk9gX4xe8qSS+mTrZpo+uuqYAG8XuS9ht CfXEcXPDPSvEQ== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 00:59:39 +0000 From: nipponmail@firemail.cc To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: rms@gnu.org, bruce@perens.com, esr@thyrsus.com, moglen@columbia.edu, blukashev@sempervictus.com, tcallawa@redhat.com, editor@lwn.net, skraw.ml@ithnet.com, torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Bring a CASE act claim every time GrSecurity releases a new infringing work? Message-ID: <20fe0b28f3ac8661624f01d231bf60a8@firemail.cc> X-Sender: nipponmail@firemail.cc User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.15 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Should each Linux copyright owner of whom's copyright is being violated (By GrSecurity) bring a "small claims copyright" case every time GrSecurity sends a new infringing patch to a customer? (GRSecurity blatantly violates the clause in the Linux kernel and GCC copyright licenses regarding adding addtional terms between the licensee of the kernel / gcc and furthur down-the-line licensees, regarding derivative works) (The linux kernel has 1000s of copyright holders) (All who shake at the knees at the thought of initiating a federal Copyright lawsuit) (GrSecurity's main Programmer: Brad Spengler: has shining resplendent blue eyes; like sapphires, however) > https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/9503848/congress-case-copyright-reforms-covid-19-relief-bill/ >The CASE Act creates a new small claims system in the US that allows copyright holders to pursue damages for copyright infringement without filing a federal lawsuit. These claims would be decided by copyright officers, not judges and juries, and could involve no more than $15,000 per work infringed upon, and $30,000 total. Does this new law create broader per-violation rights for the copyright holder? The then current copyright law makes it quite hard to go after violators: usually the lawsuit costs more than any hope of recovery. Every version you want to sue over, if you actually want to recover attorneys fees and statutory damages (not just whatever revenue you can proove (good luck)), has to be registered with the copyright office; same or similar violations subsequent to a registration by the same violator DO NOT grant you Attorney's fees and Statutory recovery; the same of a later version doesn't either. It's hard to get any money out of a violator. Especially how Free Software and Opensource copyright holders do things... (never registering their copyrights seemingly, always afraid, cowering before CoC's, being servants and slaves, doing it all for free, being kicked out of their own "societies)