Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #182204 > unrolled thread

Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly  violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? aconcernedfossdev@airmail.cc - 2017-06-15 18:10 +0200
    Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-06-15 21:20 +0200
      Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-06-15 21:50 +0200
        Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 22:40 +0200
          Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2017-06-15 22:50 +0200
          Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Michael Milliman <michael.e.milliman@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 23:00 +0200
            Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 01:20 +0200
          Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 23:20 +0200
            Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 01:10 +0200
          Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Latincom <latincom@vcn.bc.ca> - 2017-06-16 09:20 +0200
            Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 09:40 +0200
    Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 13:20 +0200
    Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly  violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? tony <lists@vanderhoff.org> - 2017-06-16 14:30 +0200
      Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-06-16 15:20 +0200
    Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 22:10 +0200
      Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-06-17 00:00 +0200

#182204 — Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly 
violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by 
his scheme to prevent redistribution.

The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the 
imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that the 
derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is 
the imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat 
is the moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth 
modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is a 
violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the transparent 
scheme shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge 
by GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.


Why does not one person here care?
Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way of 
BSD?


(Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch,
they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a
threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme
to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of
entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their
patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does
not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works,
GRSecurity does.).

------
( This song is about GRSecurity's violation of Linus et al's 
copyright**:
youtube.com/watch?v=CYnhI3wUej8
(A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#182210 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Hmm, am I feeding the spammer?  Some comments to the OP interspersed below--or 
maybe I'll just top post...

I don't know too much about the issue, and your second paragraph doesn't help 
much.

Let me ask, does Linus care--has he or some other noteworthy in the Linux / 
foss world made some sort of comment?

And have they started any sort of proceeding (negotiation, legal proceeding, 
???)?

I care about FOSS (or foss) and think that "users" in any sense of the word 
should comply with the appropriate licenses, and, if they don't some sort of 
action should be undertaken to enforce compliance.

So, why don't you cite a few (or one) cogent explanation of the problem and 
the position by a "noteworthy" (for lack of a better term).

PS: aconcernedfossdev doesn't "command" much respect in my mind, especially 
with no better explanation of the problem than what I read here.

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 11:41:56 AM aconcernedfossdev@airmail.cc wrote:
> Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
> violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
> He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by
> his scheme to prevent redistribution.
> 
> The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the
> imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that the
> derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is
> the imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat
> is the moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth
> modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is a
> violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the transparent
> scheme shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge
> by GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.
> 
> 
> Why does not one person here care?
> Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way of
> BSD?
> 
> 
> (Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch,
> they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a
> threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme
> to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of
> entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their
> patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does
> not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works,
> GRSecurity does.).
> 
> ------
> ( This song is about GRSecurity's violation of Linus et al's
> copyright**:
> youtube.com/watch?v=CYnhI3wUej8
> (A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182211 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

On 06/15/2017 02:10 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> Hmm, am I feeding the spammer?  [snip]

Likely

>
> PS: aconcernedfossdev doesn't "command" much respect in my mind, especially
> with no better explanation of the problem than what I read here.

+1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182212 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 06/15/2017 02:10 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hmm, am I feeding the spammer?  [snip]
> 
> Likely
> 
>>
>> PS: aconcernedfossdev doesn't "command" much respect in my mind,
>> especially with no better explanation of the problem than what I read
>> here.
> 
> +1

The story behind is really interesting and pretty long. I read about the
conflict perhaps 1/2y ago. Some of the accusations by GRSec make sense,
however they do not justify their policy.
In fact this is the best proof (IMO) how decentralized and open
idea/project/work etc fails. It fails on both ends the Linux and the GRSec
end because the first is not motivated to do good and the second to do good
for free it fails badly.
I do however think GRSec are wrong as the OP states, they clearly violate
the license agreements.
IMO everyone in the linux community should know the background of that story
same as the background of systemd ... but there is sooo much to know

regards

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182213 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Hello,

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 10:38:07PM +0200, deloptes wrote:
> I do however think GRSec are wrong as the OP states, they clearly violate
> the license agreements.
> IMO everyone in the linux community should know the background of that story
> same as the background of systemd ... but there is sooo much to know

As usual I think LWN provides excellent coverage of this issue.

    https://lwn.net/Articles/721848/

If possible I do recommend people pay for an LWN subscription. The
work they do is worth paying for.

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182214 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

On 06/15/2017 03:38 PM, deloptes wrote:
> Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
>> On 06/15/2017 02:10 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Hmm, am I feeding the spammer?  [snip]
>>
>> Likely
>>
>>>
>>> PS: aconcernedfossdev doesn't "command" much respect in my mind,
>>> especially with no better explanation of the problem than what I read
>>> here.
>>
>> +1
> 
> The story behind is really interesting and pretty long. I read about the
> conflict perhaps 1/2y ago. Some of the accusations by GRSec make sense,
> however they do not justify their policy.
This is the first I've heard of an issue, however, I'm not really
plugged in to that type of news, so it is not surprising.

> In fact this is the best proof (IMO) how decentralized and open
> idea/project/work etc fails. It fails on both ends the Linux and the GRSec
> end because the first is not motivated to do good and the second to do good
> for free it fails badly.
> I do however think GRSec are wrong as the OP states, they clearly violate
> the license agreements.
> IMO everyone in the linux community should know the background of that story
> same as the background of systemd ... but there is sooo much to know
Perhaps you could post a link where some of us can bone up on the issue?
> 
> regards
> 
> 
> 

-- 
73's,
WB5VQX -- The Very Quick X-ray

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182221 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Michael Milliman wrote:

> Perhaps you could post a link where some of us can bone up on the issue?

If I was the OP or I was making some statement I would like to back up I
would, otherwise I assume people on that list can babyfeed themselves.

regards

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182216 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 15 June 2017 at 21:38, deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> wrote:

> Richard Owlett wrote:
>
> > On 06/15/2017 02:10 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Hmm, am I feeding the spammer?  [snip]
> >
> > Likely
> >
> >>
> >> PS: aconcernedfossdev doesn't "command" much respect in my mind,
> >> especially with no better explanation of the problem than what I read
> >> here.
> >
> > +1
>
> The story behind is really interesting and pretty long. I read about the
> conflict perhaps 1/2y ago. Some of the accusations by GRSec make sense,
> however they do not justify their policy.
> In fact this is the best proof (IMO) how decentralized and open
> idea/project/work etc fails. It fails on both ends the Linux and the GRSec
> end because the first is not motivated to do good and the second to do good
> for free it fails badly.
> I do however think GRSec are wrong as the OP states, they clearly violate
> the license agreements.
> IMO everyone in the linux community should know the background of that
> story
> same as the background of systemd ... but there is sooo much to know
>

​When I read the OP's rhetorical question:​

​Why does not one person here care?​


​I was moved to say: because they are obsessed with systemd ........​

​But you have beaten me to the punch in a subtle way which I am both
impressed and humbled by.

MF​

regards
>
>
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182220 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Michael Fothergill wrote:

> But you have beaten me to the punch in a subtle way which I am both
> impressed and humbled by.

I assume there are other similar stories, but I don't know much of them -
time is precious nowdays. However systemd was inevitable and revealed a an
interesting story. Some time later I read this GRSec story... and I had a
feeling it's getting repetitive also in some extent Gnome, KDE, OpenOffice
and LibreOffice, GTK3 ... to just give some other examples. I think this
reflects the trends in our society ... and too many demanding political
correctness being not able to accept that there are people who don't give a
sh*t, but are worth working with. So both sides are becoming a victim of
their own ego.

regards

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182224 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 22:38:07 +0200, deloptes wrote:


> The story behind is really interesting and pretty long. I read about the
> conflict perhaps 1/2y ago. Some of the accusations by GRSec make sense,
> however they do not justify their policy.
> In fact this is the best proof (IMO) how decentralized and open
> idea/project/work etc fails. It fails on both ends the Linux and the
> GRSec end because the first is not motivated to do good and the second
> to do good for free it fails badly.
> I do however think GRSec are wrong as the OP states, they clearly
> violate the license agreements.
> IMO everyone in the linux community should know the background of that
> story same as the background of systemd ... but there is sooo much to
> know
> 
> regards

deloptes, do you have a link to systemd background information, please?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182226 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Latincom wrote:


> 
> deloptes, do you have a link to systemd background information, please?

Not at the moment. I read multiple stories in the past few years - mostly
mailing lists and articles from computer related sites. I don't gather this
information, because I am not going to cite it.

Most impressive key systemd developer banned :D I love this story - and some
accuse Linus was ignorant and not politically correct :D
https://linux.slashdot.org/story/14/04/04/1523231/linus-torvalds-suspends-key-linux-developer
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/2/420

http://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-and-others-on-linuxs-systemd/

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2841873/meet-systemd-the-controversial-project-taking-over-a-linux-distro-near-you.html
http://blog.jorgenschaefer.de/2014/07/why-systemd.html

regards

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182227 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

On Thursday 15 June 2017 16:41:56 aconcernedfossdev@airmail.cc wrote:
> Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
> violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

It isn't that we don't care.  It is that we feel helpless, which is just what 
Bard Spengler is banking on.  "Someone" needs to take him on in court. :-(

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182228

On 15/06/17 17:41, aconcernedfossdev@airmail.cc wrote:
> Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
> violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
> He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by
> his scheme to prevent redistribution.
well, what, for example, have *you* done about it?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182229 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 02:25:54PM +0200, tony wrote:
> On 15/06/17 17:41, aconcernedfossdev@airmail.cc wrote:
> > Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
> > violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
> > He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by
> > his scheme to prevent redistribution.
> well, what, for example, have *you* done about it?

Don't bother. The original post is a troll. It has been carpet-bombed
(according to the headers) to

  debian-user@lists.debian.org
  debian-project@lists.debian.org
  linux-japanese@vger.kernel.org
  linux-laptop@vger.kernel.org
  linux-lugnuts@vger.kernel.org
  linux-next@vger.kernel.org

And judging by that it has been cross-posted to even more,
just piecemeal, so to not raise red flags in mailing list
protection software.

I mean: the original topic is interesting, controversial and
all, and there's a lot to learn about licensing, governance,
communities and many other things.

It's even legitimate to grab this opportunity to discuss that
topic (as some have done upthread).

But don't expect aconcernedfossdev to answer to anything.
Heck, I doubt that (s)he has even the bandwidth to read a
significant fraction of the ripples (s)he has started on
those 6 mailing lists alone.

This behaviour is highly destructive and I think it shouldn't
be rewarded. I propose to y'all to start a new thread on
grsecurity if there is any interest in the discussion (the lwn
article mentioned upthread is definitely worth a read).

Cheers
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAllD2U0ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbcUACfeWgf3ZZp6MWVAhS6dAKeQbHh
I30An0yPeYVvmYfOqhMWtPOKgY/2Ol77
=QVn9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182236 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 15 June 2017 at 16:41, <aconcernedfossdev@airmail.cc> wrote:

> Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly
> violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?
> He is also violating the license grant, Courts would not be fooled by his
> scheme to prevent redistribution.
>
> The license grant the Linux Kernel is distributed under disallows the
> imposition of additional terms. The making of an understanding that the
> derivative work must not be redistributed (lest there be retaliation) is
> the imposition of an additional term. The communication of this threat is
> the moment that GRSecurity violates the license grant. Thence-forth
> modification, making of derivative works, and distribution of such is a
> violation of the Copyright statute. The concoction of the transparent
> scheme shows that it is a willful violation, one taken in full knowledge by
> GRSecurity of the intention of the original grantor.
>
>
> Why does not one person here care?
>

​because we are all suffering from troll envy.......

The pseudo-angst ridden discussions about systemd on the site here are not
quite as  seductive as this post.......

We can feign some fake outrage and bask in it for a time and then decide
that we must "get a life" as Bill Shatner advised the trekkies all those
years ago.

Where would we be without spam and trolling?

MF
​


> Just want to forget what holds Libre Software together and go the way of
> BSD?
>
>
> (Note: last month the GRSecurity Team removed the public testing patch,
> they prevent the distribution of the patch by paying customers by a
> threat of no further business: they have concocted a transparent scheme
> to make sure the intention of the Linux rights-holders (thousands of
> entities) are defeated) (This is unlike RedHat who do distribute their
> patches in the form the rights-holders prefer: source code, RedHat does
> not attempt to stymie the redistribution of their derivative works,
> GRSecurity does.).
>
> ------
> ( This song is about GRSecurity's violation of Linus et al's copyright**:
> youtube.com/watch?v=CYnhI3wUej8
> (A Boat Sails Away 2016 17) )
>
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182237 — Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel?

Michael Fothergill wrote:

> Where would we be without spam and trolling?

Where would we be without Bill Shatner, Kay Sievers and alike :)

regards

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web