Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753383AbXIPNxY (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:53:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751220AbXIPNxR (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:53:17 -0400 Received: from new.law.columbia.edu ([128.59.177.252]:38377 "EHLO new.law.columbia.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750838AbXIPNxQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:53:16 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 2044 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:53:16 EDT Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:17:41 -0400 Message-Id: <1993-Sun16Sep2007091741-0400-eben@softwarefreedom.org> X-Mailer: emacs 21.4.1 (via feedmail 8 I); VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: jcroberts@designtools.org Cc: jeff@garzik.org, mrmacman_g4@mac.com, jason@dixongroup.net, misc@openbsd.org, lessig_from_web@pobox.com, bkuhn@softwarefreedom.org, norwood@softwarefreedom.org, fontana@softwarefreedom.org, karen@softwarefreedom.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Statement by SFLC (was Re: Wasting our Freedom) In-Reply-To: J.C. Roberts's message of Sun, 16 Sep 2007 02:17:53 -0700 <200709160217.55933.jcroberts@designtools.org> References: <5C8C3794-C62A-4935-8267-81080CCF6867@dixongroup.net> <200709160052.45493.jcroberts@designtools.org> <46ECE554.5030308@garzik.org> <200709160217.55933.jcroberts@designtools.org> From: Eben Moglen Reply-To: Eben Moglen Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4193 Lines: 83 On Sunday, 16 September 2007, J.C. Roberts wrote: Let's say someone took the linux kernel source from the official repository, removed the GPL license and dedicated the work to public domain or put it under any other license, and for kicks back-dated the files so they are older than the originals. Now take it one step further. For the sake of example, let's assume all of this atheros driver nonsense went to a German court and the GNU/FSF/SFLC/Linux or whoever you want to call yourselves lost a criminal copyright infringement suit. You have now been legally proven to be guilty code theft. After such a ruling let's assume some jerk was to do the all the horrific stuff mentioned in the first paragraph above to the linux source tree, along with a little regex magic to call it something other than "linux" and seeded the Internet with countless copies. None of this has happened. What has happened is that people who do not have full possession of the facts and have no legal expertise-- people whom from the very beginning we have been trying to help--have made irresponsible charges and threatened lawsuits, thus slowing down our efforts to help them. It might be useful to recall the first stage of this process, when OpenBSD developers were accused of misappropriating Atheros code, and SFLC investigated and proved that no such misappropriation had occurred? Wild accusations about our motives are even more silly than they are false. We understand that attribution issues are critically important to free software developers; we are accustomed to the strong feelings that are involved in such situations. In the fifteen years I have spent giving free legal help to developers throughout the community, attribution disputes have been, always, the most emotionally charged. But making threats of litigation and throwing around words like "theft" and "malpractice" was a Really Bad Idea, because once some people started using that language--thus making adversaries rather than collaborators of themselves--I had no choice but to ask my clients and my colleagues to stop communicating with them. Let me therefore point out one last time that if the threats of litigation and bluster about crime and malpractice--none of which has the slightest basis in fact or law--were withdrawn, we would be able to resume detailed communication with everyone who has a stake in the outcome. Also, and again for the last time, let me state that SFLC's instructions from its clients are to establish all the facts concerning the development of the current relevant code (which means the painstaking reconstruction of several independent and overlapping lines of development, including forensic reconstruction through line-by-line code reviews where version control system information is not available), as well as to resolve all outstanding legal issues, and to make policy recommendations, if possible, that would result in all projects, under both GPL and ISC, having full access to all code on their preferred terms, on an *ongoing* basis, with full respect for everyone's legal rights. We continue to believe those policy goals are achievable in this situation. The required work has been made more arduous because some people have chosen not to cooperate in good faith. But we will complete the work as soon as we can, and we will, as Mr Garvik says, follow the community's practice of complete publication, so everyone can see all the evidence. We will make no more public statements until the work is complete, and we will be neither hurried nor intimidated by people who shout at us instead of helping. -- Eben Moglen v: 212-461-1901 Professor of Law, Columbia Law School f: 212-580-0898 moglen@ Founding Director, Software Freedom Law Center columbia.edu 1995 Broadway (68th Street), fl #17, NYC 10023 softwarefreedom.org - 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/