bofh wrote:

quoted text
> On 9/15/07, Jason Dixon  wrote:

>> This has everything to do with Stallman's FSF/SFLC lawyer cronies.

>> They're the ones giving faulty counsel to Linux developers.

>

> I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this.  People who

> have spoken with him indicated to me that he is forthright about what

> he wants (ie, GPL), and does not back down easily, unless you give him

> a very good reason (ie, you better be damned convincing and have facts

> on your side).  Much like Theo, actually.

I was welling to do so until he requested to be left out of it. Then it

was obvious that he endorse the action, why? As the writer of many

variation of the GPL licenses, he can't clam ignorance on the subject

and not capable to understand it. Or let me restate that. May be not

understand all possible aspect of the GPL as it's so long and

convoluted, may be, just may be, I could accept that.
But the very short, simple and clear BSD license. No way he can say he

doesn't understands it! Sorry I can't possibly buy that, even in my

wildest dream of stupidity. And I tried.
For him to not voice his objection to it, because of all his background

and what he is fighting for, can only mean he endorse it. Call that

judgment of characters if you want, or what ever you like it to be,

doesn't change the outcome.
> As this is a matter of interpretation of law, I doubt if he would be involved.

quoted text
>

> I may be wrong.

He sure can understand just to well what the BSD license mean and sure

know just to well what is going on here. To all that said it's a bias

debate and that BSD lovers deform the fact and are lying, etc. What ever

your grasp or interest on the subject might be. I will not even use any

of it.
Fact #1

Richard Stallman founder of FSF:

http://www.gnu.org/people/people.html

No debate and can't be argue.
Fact #2

Work very closely with Eben Moglen to create SFLC

http://www.fsf.org/news/sflc-1.html

No debate and can't be argue.
Fact #3

Any way you want to look at it, looks like very much a Copyright

violation was committed, but then SFLC said it's OK. Front page:

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/

No debate and can't be argue.
Fact #4

And publish a release to that effect

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/jul/31/openhal

No debate and can't be argue.
Fact 5.6.7

Then the Linux kernel imported the BSD license driver and changed the

copyright, three times so far on it, in different variation.

No debate and can't be argue.
Fact 8

Reyk Floeter maid it public and well known that he didn't want his code

to be release under GPL.

http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=118881908304473&w=2

No debate and can't be argue.
But what does the GPL side reply. That they consulted their lawyers and

that's a mess, but that they know what they are doing.

Here however, everyone argue on the subject, but the facts remains.
In the end, if users, developers, lovers, die hard believers, bias ones,

and what not can't see that. I can't help it.
I am not a lawyers and sure not interested to be one, or even pretend to

understand most of it, but even not be native English, I sure can read

and understand what's going on however.
Now, I don't know of any case where a by stander were prosecuted for

witnessing a crime and not doing anything about it. I only know it was

on the news not so long ago when people witness crime committed and just

watch and sure could have stop it and did nothing.
But, at the same time, if you take position in favor of a committed

crime, should there be one, or a violation, should you witness one, I am

not expert and do not want to debate that either, however, aren't you

becoming accessory to the crime, or doing obstruction to justice by

doing so, or trying to deform the facts? Think about it, but don't say

anything and don't reply to me please, I am not interested to know what

you think. I already got plenty of nonsense emails already from people

that I can only conclude didn't spend 5 minutes to get the facts first,

but that were replying based on their love/hate relation to GPL vs BSD

only, or favorite Linux/GNU distribution, or what not.
Just really look at yourself in the mirror deeply and at the fact and

then asked yourself if that's really what you want and who you are and

will let you these facts define who you really are as a unique person?
Are you going to promote that behavior, or voice your objection about it.
I don't know, but if I was involve with it, or developing software under

the GPL, or contributing back to the GPL/Linux/GNU under these

conditions, on my own time, with my own talents, using my own knowledge,

  as a free will and gift to others, without pressure to do so, in the

intention to make it a better place for my fellow users/developers, I

would think twice before doing it again under the GPL and be associate

with these type of people, or even why I did it in the first place, but

that sure may not have been known to be at first.
I would have to asked myself this simple question.
In face of the facts, I see it wrong and from the top down it's wrong

and they do wrong.
Do I really want to be part of that?
Is it really who I am?
Will I let them define my personality and integrity this way?
Do, I disregard my fellow users/developers to that level to want to

screw them that bad.
Do, I let others take advantage of my good will this way.
Etc, the list is very long if you have some integrity.
And before you say I am way off, or out of line, think about it.
You can always define who you are in your life, that's your choice and a

freedom you have, or you can let others define it for you.
Witch one will it be?
If you see wrong and you accept it as is and do not try to correct it

when even provided with all the facts, then may be you agree with it?
May be you don't want to be involve and be a by stander. Fine, so far

that's not a crime and I do not want to debate if that should be or not.

It is not relevant here. You sure have that choice and rightfully can

choose to do nothing.
However, much worst then doing nothing is that if you continue being

part of it after all that, aren't you actually endorsing it as well for

that point forward?
I would say so. You can't clam ignorance for that point forward can you?
So, for all that was done before and to all that was said, that this is

not a representation of the Linux community at large, it's users, or

it's developers, or the GPL community, what ever you want to use to

define it. I am way more then welling to believe that and I am sure it's

not the case.
However, it's simple to show it an proof that it is not the case then.
You can't changed what others that you trusted did in the past, but what

you do from this point forward is completely up to you however.
So, you have a choice to make here, witch one will it be?
Continuing forward, you can't clam ignorance anymore, or say it's not

your belief, or what define you, etc.
I will sure grant you 150% the fact that you may not have know what it

was all about or that doing GPL work isn't what you are. Or that the

action taken do not represent your choice. Or that your usage of GPL

software or distribution did make you agree with the value it represent,

etc.
Yes, I sure can accept all that big time. And it is very reasonable to

see that too.
But going forward however, what will you say?
You can't clam that anymore as you know it, did nothing, accepted it and

then endorse it by using it and contributing to it.
Will you let others define who you are, or will you do it for yourself?
The choice is your to make and no one else.
I don't think Richard needs to be protected here by any mean really. He

has proven many times over that he can take care of himself. Nor that

Linux himself needs to be protected as well, he can and did many times

too and the list go one. There is no point to make excuse for them when

they do nothing in front of wrong doing and they see it.
The real question is more if you will let them define who you really are

and what your position really is.
This is a very in lighting social experience to me.
Best to all of you in what ever choice you will make going forward, it

will define who you are and what are your belief from this point

forward, so choose wisely and what ever choice you make, I really wish

you the best of luck with it, what ever it might be.
I only ask that you take some time to think first before you act.
Knowing what you are fighting for is half the win already.
Thank you.
Daniel
PS: Yes, I did break my own words of not replying again, but I wish not

to going forward. I strongly believe the issue is very important however

and fell I had to do so. My apologies. My hopes are to close this

subject and to turn it into a time of reflections so that everyone can

take times to reassess where they are and then more forward, what ever

that decision might be, but that everyone will do so knowingly and

that's my deepest wish!