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 DB619483 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 16:34:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 791691AF for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 16:34:34 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luck, Tony" To: Matthew Garrett , Greg KH Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 16:34:32 +0000 Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F3A1AFCC0@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <20160824130832.GA28564@kroah.com> <1472052583.61594.577.camel@infradead.org> <20160824174724.GE30853@kroah.com> <20160824205011.GA31615@ebb.org> <20160824215447.GA5368@kroah.com> <20160825040619.GA32072@ebb.org> <20160826005914.GA12749@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 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: , > If your focus is mainly on "How can we maximise contribution of $ and > developers to Linux", then yes, your approach makes sense. But that > comes at the cost of a vast number of users left with closed devices, > abandoned by their manufacturers, waiting for someone to find another > massive security flaw that we left behind in 2.6. These people matter, > and we shouldn't ignore their needs. A better legal tactic might be to get some product liability laws on the books that include a specific long term liability exception for products that ship with full source. If those existed, then corporate lawyers would be advising that using open source and making it available would be the way to avoid giant liabilities like the asbestos and lead-in-paint suits. [Disclaimer: my own random musings, not the opinion of my employer] -Tony