On 15-Sep-07, at 10:57 PM, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
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.
These 'facts' have absolutely nothing to do with the re-licensing
argument. The articles linked deal with potential infringement on
Atheros' copyright or intellectual property or whatever and were
written almost a full month before the offending patches were
published. I'm all for supporting Reyk in this, but don't you think
that goal would be better accomplished by using arguments that make
sense?
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!
You write too much.
Jeremy
