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 BF5CA258 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:59:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-f65.google.com (mail-oi0-f65.google.com [209.85.218.65]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D4A2246 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:59:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f65.google.com with SMTP id t127so7719730oie.1 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:59:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linus971@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: <1472225332.2751.56.camel@redhat.com> <1472230114.2751.67.camel@redhat.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:59:53 -0700 Message-ID: To: Matthew Garrett Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > We agree that quiet negotiation is the preferred tactic. We agree that > lawsuits may be necessary as a final resort. It doesn't seem like > we're disagreeing on anything fundamental in that respect. What Karen > has suggested is an opportunity for the kernel community to give clear > input into when that final resort should be acceptable. Heh. Sounds like we do indeed end up agreeing here, there was nothing I disagreed with in this email for example. Maybe I read more into Bradley's saying than I should have, but it _really_ rubbed me the wrong way. I really think the biggest impact of the GPL have been almost _entirely_ outside any legal issues, and that it's a great document not because it's a great legal piece of writing, but because of much bigger issues. That may be why I reacted *so* negatively to seeing it argued that it's pointless without enforcement. Almost none of the successes of the GPL have ever been about the legal side. To put it in ridiculously overly grandiose historical terms: nobody enforces the magna carta any more - it's not like you need to. It's the *ideas* that matter, and the fact that it changed the world. But as I started out saying, I actually support discussing this at the kernel summit, it's just that I absolutely do *not* think it's about having lawyers present. Because that's not the point. Linus