Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 92 posts

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#61

Post by shakna »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #52
shakna wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, they'll either be much more careful about hiding their reliance, or just strip Linux out of everything. Not contribute back.

And you think by not punishing such companies then they'll come in to compliance? It strikes me such companies never intended to comply with their legal obligations - make that position financially untenable and use the money to support development/developers who are compliant.

That's not my position either.

Most companies will see a lawsuit as an attack, and blacklist interacting with you in the future if they can. It reflects badly on the FOSS community, and makes future interactions even more difficult. There are a lot of businesses that will fight relying on any FOSS product, but leap at precisely the same thing with a paid license.

However, more polite requests usually get canned without reading.

This is a tough problem, with hypersensitive businesses thrown in the mix. Wielding the GPL like a hammer won't help, but ignoring it won't either.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#62

Post by krylon »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #58
neotek wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can disable autoplay in Chrome by navigating to chrome://flags and setting the "autoplay policy" config option to require explicit user activation. In Firefox, navigate to about:config, and change media.autoplay.enabled to false.

The video autoplayed for me so I decided to check this setting which I was 99% sure I had already set at some point in the past (I use Chrome). Turns out I had and ZDNet is somehow getting around it. Another site for the blacklist, then.

You might want to give uMatrix a try. It can be a bit of a pain at times, but in my experience, it catches autoplay videos quite reliably, as well as a lot of ads.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#63

Post by dizzystar »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #55
dizzystar wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree in some sense. My issue is pulling the trigger to fast and too hard, and there doesn't seem to be a good answer to that. Even though I do my best to follow licenses, I may be making a mistake somewhere. If I heard a case where was sued for $1M to a GPLv2 software, I'd strongly consider moving over to a propriety product and pay $10 a month to mitigate my risk. Remember that every uninstall is one less user, w…

If you heard of a case where someone without a driving license was punished, would you - having done your due diligence to get a license and conky with its requirements - get worried you also would be punished and so choose to always take taxis? Are these non-compliant companies using cracked versions of other closed-source software? I'll bet they pay for their MS licenses, because they know MS will sue them if they…

Of course there are companies using cracked versions of software.

We also know kids use all sorts of cracked software as well. The reason they don't get sued is because the companies know that it is bad blood to sue. They know that, in the future, these kids will be running offices and they will buy that software they loved.

Granted, the goodwill ends up with money coming in, but it's the same theory with open source. Most large projects are backed by companies that earn millions. The idea of a single dude doing free work is often times a myth.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#64

Post by Traubenfuchs »

shdon wrote: post #40

I'll admit this is offtopic, but why on earth do they insist on putting an unrelated video on autoplay at the top of the page? I'm there to read the article and just when I've read the first few sentences, I get distracted by movement and the sound of Linux Torvalds' voice. Something about DRM and GPLv3 which are not at all related to the article contents. Sure, it might be an interesting video, but on autoplay... re…

I started using Stylebot to permanently delete elements I don't want to see from the pages I visit. Everything becomes so clean. Just the content.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#65

Post by John_KZ »

shdon wrote: post #40

I'll admit this is offtopic, but why on earth do they insist on putting an unrelated video on autoplay at the top of the page? I'm there to read the article and just when I've read the first few sentences, I get distracted by movement and the sound of Linux Torvalds' voice. Something about DRM and GPLv3 which are not at all related to the article contents. Sure, it might be an interesting video, but on autoplay... re…

Video views pay a lot more than page views. Also they're just trying to capture your attention regardless of the article. It's an annoying bussiness tactic.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#66

Post by emiliobumachar »

paulsutter wrote: post #17

If anyone needed another reason to avoid GPL software here you go. I thought the whole idea of open source was to avoid litigious assholes.

Upvoted despite the tone, because this argument is the perfect answer to all those questioning why the mainstream open source community does not agree with McHardy's style of enforcement.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#67

Post by phaemon »

shakna wrote: post #54
older wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you give an example? Any company that stripped Linux out of their product?

Not without breaching an NDA. But how about a public case? Verizon got caught breaching the GPL with Busybox.[!] At the end of the day, they agreed to become compliant... And Busybox is no longer a product they use or distribute. [0][1] [!] https://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/mar/17/busybox-ver... [0] https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/equipme... [1] https://github.com/verizon

Your link [1] has a link to a page with the Actiontec firmware downloads that includes Busybox. They clearly are still distributing it and are following the complience agreement. This appears to be an example that is the direct opposite of what you were trying to show.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#68

Post by crdoconnor »

shakna wrote: post #61
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you think by not punishing such companies then they'll come in to compliance? It strikes me such companies never intended to comply with their legal obligations - make that position financially untenable and use the money to support development/developers who are compliant.

That's not my position either. Most companies will see a lawsuit as an attack, and blacklist interacting with you in the future if they can. It reflects badly on the FOSS community, and makes future interactions even more difficult. There are a lot of businesses that will fight relying on any FOSS product, but leap at precisely the same thing with a paid license. However, more polite requests usually get canned witho…

>Most companies will see a lawsuit as an attack, and blacklist interacting with you in the future if they can. It reflects badly on the FOSS community, and makes future interactions even more difficult. There are a lot of businesses that will fight relying on any FOSS product

The companies that will strip out FOSS from all of their products will have to cripple their product, increase their lead times and increase their costs - possibly all three.

If FOSS is competing with their closed source product, that makes FOSS more competitive. If companies that respect FOSS compete with their product, that makes them more competitive. These are good things.

I don't think it pays to accommodate companies with laywers that behave irrationally in response to enforcement of the GPL and it certainly doesn't pay to respond to bully tactics by relenting.

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#69

Post by larkeith »

Buge wrote: post #46
larkeith wrote: post #5

Unless I'm missing something, it sounds like McHardy has only dropped one of his "over 38" cases, due to the potential for a much more expensive, risky legal battle. What's to prevent him from continuing his activities in other jurisdictions under less savvy judges? Also, how is this a victory by Linux? I see no mention of activity by the rest of the Linux community while Geniatech fought the legal battle.

>Also, how is this a victory by Linux? I see no mention of activity by the rest of the Linux community The Linux community suspended McHardy from being a core developer. The stable branch maintainer said the lawsuits "have threatened the confidence in our ecosystem". And the technical advisory board is asking developers to sign a statement that they are not seeking financial gain.

I'm not sure if McHardy's suspension as a core developer might weaken his legal ground (he still was a core developer for plenty of years, and presumably his contributions remain), but otherwise most of these actions seem preventative for future bad actors. However, in another article on the case [1], the below was noted:

"sworn affidavits of senior kernel developer Greg Kroah-Hartman and current netfilter maintainer Pablo Neira were presented in support of some of [Geniatech's] claims. The contents of those are unfortunately not public, neither is the contents of the sworn affidavists presented by the plaintiff."

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16562143

Re: Linux beats legal threat from one of its own developers

#70

Post by rst »

bsder wrote: post #43
larkeith wrote: post #5

Unless I'm missing something, it sounds like McHardy has only dropped one of his "over 38" cases, due to the potential for a much more expensive, risky legal battle. What's to prevent him from continuing his activities in other jurisdictions under less savvy judges? Also, how is this a victory by Linux? I see no mention of activity by the rest of the Linux community while Geniatech fought the legal battle.

I also don't understand how this is even an issue. The companies can make him go away simply by complying with the GPL, no? While what McHardy is doing may not be the most diplomatic stunt, it's kind of hard for me to sympathize when the companies wouldn't have to pay anything if they would just comply with the GPL license . If you don't want to comply with the GPL, use BSD or something. Am I missing something or cou…

Per text of the article, McHardy was asking for restitution involving not just future compliance, but also direct cash payments to him, of more than a million euros per violation, which had apparently already resulted in settlements which got him "at least a few million euros".
Post reply on HN