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

[Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>]

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 05:41:36PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> These sorts of legal / political questions are things for which I
> believe the Kernel Summit isn't well equipped to handle.  In
> particular, if the SFC has a pre-existing agenda --- that is, if they
> have clients and have lawyers who who believe very strongly that the
> next step is to "bring the question to a lot of Courts"[1] --- and
> they want a forum to try to convince kernel developers to support them
> in trying to force the courts around the world to give us an answer to
> legal questions around the GPL --- that's inherently a political
> question, and I don't think it's appropriate give them a soapbox to
> try to let them advance that agenda at the Kernel Summit.

I think we can expect better than that.  We regularly give platforms to
people who work for various entities, and they know not to use that
platform as a soapbox, even when their employer/organization holds a
particular position.  I think the same thing applies here, and I
personally would trust Conservancy folks to help drive an actual
*discussion* about these issues, where their own position rates a
mention but not a soapbox.  I don't think KS should host a rally; I *do*
think KS should host a session on the state of legal issues around the
kernel, what direction we want to see those go in, and what technical
and development practices may interact with those, including both our
existing practices and any potential proposals for changes to those
practices.