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 79CBE25A for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:49:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f180.google.com (mail-yw0-f180.google.com [209.85.161.180]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E20E311A for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:49:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f180.google.com with SMTP id j12so52881248ywb.2 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:49:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1472225332.2751.56.camel@redhat.com> <1472230114.2751.67.camel@redhat.com> From: Matthew Garrett Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:49:05 -0400 Message-ID: To: Linus Torvalds 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 1:21 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > But within this discussion it's somewhat interesting to note that the > Linksys WRT54GL that is now known as a "Linux router" was actually > once one of the bad guys. They *hadn't* originally released source > code for the WRT54G, and there was a stink, and the company noticed, > and things got much better. And yet Linksys were still in violation (even on the WRT54GL!) in 2008, resulting in a lawsuit (which they settled). That was after two and a half years of quiet negotiation between the FSF and Linksys. People had raised a stink. Discussions happened. Linksys didn't come into compliance until the suit was filed, and to this day they continue to distribute Linux-based routers and provide the source. Which part of this was inappropriate? What should have been done instead?