Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues

[Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 09:06:19PM -0700, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
> I work for an organization that holds copyrights in Linux, and Conservancy
> furthermore coordinates a coalition of developers who signed agreements
> asking us to enforce their copyrights.  We also have embedded device users
> writing us weekly asking us to please get the Linux sources for their
> devices.  We have a huge mandate, and we're going to enforce (always adhering
> to the Principles of Community-Oriented Enforcement, of course).

Bradley,

If the Conservancy is going to do what it's going to do, it's not
clear what's the purpose of having a discussion.

Having a debate implies that there is a question on the floor, and to
date it's not clear what the question or questions would be.  Yes,
it's clear what you and Karen have proposed as the *topic*, and the
Conservancy's positions aren't really a secret --- but that's not a
debatable question; it's not a specific proposal that could be
examined.

And even if we have a question on the floor; say, "Resolved: that
hackers should only use Emacs and not vi" --- we would want to
evaluate that question on several metrics: "Is the question what that
can be profitably debated?"  "Is the a way to determine which side has
one the debate?"  "Will the 'winners' of the debate be able to enforce
the outcome of the debate?"  "Do the people deciding who wins and who
loses have the legal / moral standing to be make such a decision and
to bind the rest of the community or industry?"

There is plenty of time for discussion for the sake of dicussion and
that's at the bar.  :-)

					- Ted