Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 14:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20070405.142157.74750261.davem@davemloft.net>
To: deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org
Cc: jeff@garzik.org, mb@bu3sch.de, mglocker@openbsd.org,
	jsimola@gmail.com, deraadt@theos.com, stefano.brivio@polimi.it,
	martin-langer@gmx.de, kugelfang@gentoo.org,
	andreas.jaggi@waterwave.ch, larry.finger@lwfinger.net,
	Quaker.Fang@sun.com, johannes@sipsolutions.net, josejx@gentoo.org,
	linville@tuxdriver.com, greg@kroah.com,
	bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	license-violation@gpl-violations.org
Subject: Re: OpenBSD bcw: Possible GPL license violation issues 
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <200704052056.l35KuTIr025210@cvs.openbsd.org>
References: <46155E82.2040808@garzik.org>
	<200704052056.l35KuTIr025210@cvs.openbsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

From: Theo de Raadt <deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 14:56:29 -0600

> > Snipped?  I presume, then, you admit you are misrepresenting others' 
> > opinions in this thread.
> 
> No, there was a side discussion about whitespace and variable naming,
> and even algorithms covered by the GPL.  Gimme a break.  These were
> essentially claimed by some of the examples shown by Michael.  Go look
> carefully.

The main aim right now for you is to deflect as much attention as
possible away from the fact that someone was caught red handed putting
GPL'd code into a BSD driver.

That is why you keep harping back to the issue about Michael's
approach to dealing with this.

I understand why you might want to do damage control like this.

There is also no way one can directly copy GPL'd code into a BSD
driver, check it into a CVS tree, and have no idea what in the world
one is doing.  I don't believe that argument for one second.

A developer working on a BSD driver for 6 months is oblivious to the
fact that copying in some GPL'd code might not be a good idea?  Give
me a break.

There have been some very clever methods employed here in this thread
to control the path of a conversation.  For example, you knew that if
you gave the full URL for the Empathy article at Wikipedia, nobody
would click on it and read it.  Yet you used a tinyurl, and this had
the psychological effect of making nearly everyone reading curious
what the tinyurl pointed to, and they clicked it.  You even got me
with that one.