SFLC on Atheros Driver Issue
,----[ Quote ]
| Let me therefore point out one last time that if the threats of litigation
| and bluster about crime and malpractice--none of which has the slightest
| basis in fact or law--were withdrawn, we would be able to resume detailed
| communication with everyone who has a stake in the outcome.
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/SFLC_on_Atheros_Driver_Issue
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2007/9/16/261061
Related:
Atheros Driver Developments
http://kerneltrap.org/OpenBSD/Atheros_Driver_Developments
Relicensing: what's legal and what's right
,----[ Quote ]
| In the end, distributing versions of the ath5k driver under GPLv2 (with the
| requisite copyright attributions maintained) is something which the Linux
| community is entitled to do. Anybody who does not like more restrictive
| conditions being applied to BSD-licensed code is well advised to avoid using
| the BSD license to begin with. But the legal ability to do something does not
| make that something the right course of action. Only the developers who have
| worked on the ath5k driver have the right to decide which license they will
| use, but it's worth saying that allowing the BSD community to make use of
| work done on the ath5k driver would be a friendly gesture and an
| acknowledgment of the value of the code we got from them. The benefits from
| such an act would likely outweigh any cost associated with allowing unwanted
| proprietary use of the code which has been added to this driver.
`----
http://lwn.net/Articles/247872/
Open Source coders caught stealing Open Source code
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38746
|
|
