[lkml]   [1999]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Reiserfs licencing - possible GPL conflict?

    Dear Greg,

    You've got a pretty foul mouth. I think more is better for Linux.
    Linux could use more FS's and features, and I think having a B++ tree
    tht overlays EXT2 is pretty cool. Also, a grep of the Linux source base
    for the name "Greg Maxwell" returns <NULL> which is how much weight I am
    going to give your comments. You can call Andrew McCullough at
    801-222-9635 if you want to talk to our attorneys (since you asked for
    his phone #) if you need to understand his thinking about the GPL. He's
    53 years old, and has been doing IP law for about 25 years. Hope this


    Greg Maxwell wrote:
    > "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
    > > My attorneys have reviewed this license and they tell me that this means
    > > that the ReiserFS is ***NOT*** open sourced. Using it with this
    > > restriction makes any commercial vendors who want to ship it liable for
    > > damages claims, since the act of shipping it means they will integrate
    > > it with an OS. We thought of doing something similiar with NWFS, but
    > > our attorneys, after spending several weeks examining the GPL and
    > > reviewing case law for open source IP, advised us is that we either
    > > could "give it all away" or restrict it, but that if we placed any
    > > restrictions on it, it wasn't open sourced. If you place any use
    > > restrictions, then you are in essence not releasing as "open" source.
    > > As such, we opted for the full GPL with no restrictions, since they
    > > defeat the whole purpose under current US law. I know lots of folks
    > > want to maintain some control (which is not a bad thing if you are
    > > trying to turn a profit), but they should understand that a GPL+ license
    > > scheme defeats the whole point and makes the stuff less attractive .....
    > Jeff, cut the bullshit. This isn't the first time you've fudded
    > something on the list. Your lies are NOT appricated. (i.e. do a archive
    > search for your name and GPL).
    > Legally there is NO such thing as 'open source'. There is the OSD, which
    > this should be completely okay with.
    > I'd like to know the name of your attorneys as I can't believe that a
    > real attorney would make such a bold statement on just a few hours
    > consideration. Perhaps you should be looking for a new attorney?
    > Furthermore, if you actually bother to read the poor english license of
    > the code, it's aparent that the language is intended to limit use but
    > distribution, as the GPL already does. It looks like all he is trying to
    > do is preventing someone like Netware (or netapp!) from just taking his
    > FS.
    > I agree that Hans should clear it up. I'm sure he will real soon.
    > Perhaps you are just afraid that new developments like ReiserFS are
    > making your efforts on the near dead NWFS increasingly pointless?
    > I wonder why your wonderful attorneys forgot to warn you that you can
    > get in trouble for making false comments about a compeating product, and
    > advise you to keep your mouth shut?
    > Strange.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.023 / U:4.724 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site