Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL enforcement actions

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 08:41:35AM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
> 
> 
> On 07/07/2015 01:18 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 13:00 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >> As those "efforts" are being driven by the developers of the kernel, I
> >> think that the developers involved would be the best to present this,
> >> not the SF Conservancy people.  As you point out, the SFLC is just the
> >> lawyers being hired by the developers to do what they want them to do :)
> > 
> > A lot of those developers will be in the room too, of course.
> > 
> > But the "efforts" are being driven *by* Conservancy on *behalf* of
> > those developers who have asked Conservancy to do so. And I suspect
> > someone from Conservancy is better placed to give up-to-date
> > information about what's actually happening "on the ground".
> > 
> > The point is to get people in the room and have a direct discussion
> > without hearsay or misinformation — and doing that *without* someone
> > from Conservancy doesn't really make much sense.
> 
> My experience with this is that you'll get one side (and perspective)
> of the compliance enforcement story, only.  Companies involved in
> compliance "improvement" exercises simply will not comment on them, so
> it's not easy to tell if the remedies being requested are understood
> by all parties or not, and whether I'd agree with them.

s/will not/usually can not/g

I'm worried that since a lot of people can't talk about this, for
various reasons, that the usefulness of it might not be all that
helpful.

> From my standpoint it would be useful to hear the Conservancy's stance
> on a few issues.

What specific issues are you curious about that you think would be
good to discuss / hear about?

thanks,

greg k-h