Software Freedom Law Center vs Theo de Raadt

An anonymous reader writes "In a recent public posting to the Linux Kernel mailing list the founder of the Software Freedom Law Center, Eben Moglen, lashed back at OpenBSD creator Theo de Raadt without actually mentioning his name. 'What has happened is that people who do not have full possession of the facts and have no legal expertise — people whom from the very beginning we have been trying to help — have made irresponsible charges and threatened lawsuits, thus slowing down our efforts to help them.' Moglen pointed out that they have and continue to help all open source projects, including OpenBSD, but the process takes time. 'The required work has been made more arduous because some people have chosen not to cooperate in good faith. But we will complete the work as soon as we can, and we will follow the community's practice of complete publication, so everyone can see all the evidence.'"

Comments

Chandon Seldon is a Censor

[itsybitsy]

Naturally I don't have to point out the irony of your signature line, or do I?

If you aren't a lawyer and haven't written any code then STFU. Seriously.

The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.

It's funny how you indite yourself with your signature line. Asking someone to "STFU" is an act of censorship, Mr. Censor!!!

Re:Chandon Seldon is a Censor

[Chandon Seldon]

It's funny how you indite yourself with your signature line. Asking someone to "STFU" is an act of censorship, Mr. Censor!!!

Censorship occurs when someone (or some organization) in a position of authority prevents or removes someone else's speech.

I'm simply responding from a position of no authority. That can *never* be censorship, regardless of what I say. My opinion happens to be that the original poster's comment didn't need to be posted - but that in no way means that I would support someone using force to *prevent* him from stating his worthless opinion.

Re:Derivative Works MUST Make Siginificant Changes

[QuantumG]

And I'm simply telling you that you are wrong and don't know what you are talking about.

What don't you get?

You're obviously used to bullshitting to people who don't know squat and now you're talking to someone who does and you can't understand why they're telling you to fuck off?

Re:Do I understand this correctly?

[sl3xd]

I'm more an observer in both cases; maybe it's that the Linux code into BSD was months ago and memory has faded. But it seems that the reaction of some in the BSD community is louder & longer. When I first heard of the Linux code being put into BSD, my thought was something to the extent of "Some people are making a very big fuss over a really minor mistake -- that was immediately corrected". And with the exception of a few GPL-Nazis, the issue was considered resolved.

I find it interesting that there appears to be more noise coming from the 'BSD code being used in Linux' - part of it is no doubt due to misinterpretation of the BSD license, and some pure reciprocity on the part of prominent OpenBSD coders. (And some equally bad behavior of the 'GPL-forever' crowd).

I find it odd that OpenBSD -- not Net, Free, or DragonFly BSD, seem to get the headlines for bad relations with Linux & GPL projects; especially as FreeBSD is the most popular of the bunch. I's almost as if some in the OpenBSD project want to prohibit their code from being used in GPL projects; a restriction not found in the BSD license.

Either way, just fix the problem and move on. Vitriolic grandstanding doesn't do anybody any good.

I do find it funny that some of the arguments are centered around minutae in copyright law in Germany. While the argument may hold weight in Germany, it doesn't hold any weight in the other countries any more than the USA's copyright laws have on the (Russian) allofmp3.com, or on the (Swedish) pirate bay.