From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E49A4305 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 15:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5278162 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 15:29:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1472225332.2751.56.camel@redhat.com> From: Rik van Riel To: Linus Torvalds , Matthew Garrett Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 11:28:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: "Bradley M. Kuhn" , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2016-08-25 at 22:24 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Matthew Garrett > wrote: > >  > > Users benefit from code availability, even if it isn't contributed > > upstream. > > The thing is, long term, what really matters is the eventual upstream > contribution. > > The non-contributor company that isn't contributing is by definition > not spreading his DNA around. They don't matter in the long run. > > What matters are the people - and companies - that actually develop > and contribute code, and make the future happen. Are you saying that the freedom of end users to modify the software running on their Linux devices is irrelevant? The downstream freedoms seem to be generating new upstream communities all around us, for example OpenWRT.