[Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:58:57PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:17:31PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > Again, the SFC puts the GPL before Linux,
> > 
> > That's news to me. I think everyone on the alliance would have a fit if
> > this were true. So please stop equating Bradley's own sentiments to that
> > of the alliance's. If that's the message folks get then we need to correct
> > this.
> 
> Given that the alliance's membership is secret, we only have your word
> on it. 

Its optionally secret so developer's privacies can be respected, which means
some folks are willing to say publicly they are part of it and some are not.
Why would someone not want to come out ? Well why would they with such
hostility going around ? First one needs to understand why the hostility is
there and now it seems some clarify is coming up. Is it because companies who
use Linux don't want to give developers and users their freedoms, or because of
tact? It sounds like its the tact. Can you confirm if that is correct ?

I came out before these clarifications given I have an employer who has built
into their DNA FOSS and understands these issues are part of our DNA to resolve
and they have the patience to deal with this. It is critical to both understand
these issues and resolve them in an amicable way, with the community and
developers, as transparently as possible. A concern others face is the chance of
being put on a sort of a persona non grata list for employers. Does such a list
exist ? I don't know, but such concerns exist. If you have kids to maintain the
pressure is even harder. I personally have the luxury to not be concerned over
this since I have a supportive employer and do not have children -- nor plan
on having any ;) Not only that, if my employer were to start doing crazy things
I'm assured I would not be the only one to step out, and worst come to worst, I
could just go and hack on Linux from a beach in Costa Rica. That's not a bad
thing. I know of some retired developers who go around travelling and
contributing when they can to Linux on 802.11 :D There's not many folks in
similar situations though, and you cannot rationally expect someone to
compromise on this.

If the concerns are not clear for some folks to come out -- please let me know.

> And the governance mechanisms of the alliance have also not
> been spelled out publically.  Do you guys vote?

Like I said before -- no, because we so far have pretty much have had
consensus. We should probably consider voting if such consensus were
not happening. Its something to discuss in the coalition.

> Is it weighted based
> on the amount of code someone brings to the "alliance"?  Or is it just
> one head, one vote?  So if someone with a large amount of code where
> they own the copyright comes to the project, and Bradley then uses
> this fact to browbeat a vendor, and that person says, woah, that
> doesn't seem right?  Do they get one vote, or something proportional
> to what they bring to the table? 

We have no had to deal with this issue or concern, we so far have had
consensus. If the issue comes up then we should talk about it in the
coalition, among developers.

> Sure, they can withdraw from the
> alliance, so there is _some_ recourse after you've signed on the
> dotted lines, but only after 30 days, and a lot of threats could be
> issued in their name in 30 days...

It sounds like these are terms you can discuss with Conservancy and see
if its possible to address them. After all -- these are the sorts of
things I would have expected from you know, a Q&A which you could get
immediate feedback from Karen from.

> It doesn't help the SFC that there's no transparency in its actions.

What type of transparency would you like ?

> A similar dynamic is at work when the FBI issues national security
> letters with gag orders attached.

Seriously Ted... you are comparing FBI gag orders with Conservancy's
coalition. Because unless my eyes need LASIK again -- which maybe they
do -- this just happened. Let us recall Karen was the one who brought
up in the list the idea of *flying out* to KS and let developers, you
know, ask questions. Does the FBI does this sort of crap ? Hell no!

> So some kind of regular
> transparency report where companies have been contacted by the SFC are
> described in some general way ("a handset vendor", "a consumer
> electronics product"), the nature of the violation ("lack of
> apparently otherwise unmodified source code available on the vendor's
> FTP site", "apparent mixing of GPL code with some incompatible open
> source license", "out-and-out blatent misuse of Linux code in a
> completely unrelated commercial virtualization product," etc.) and the
> steps taken (friendly contact, lawsuit threatened, lawsuit filed,
> etc.) might be helpful in the long run.

I am not sure, this seems like it might break confidentiality for companies...
but IANAL, so if we had a Q&A perhaps you could have gotten a direct answer,
maybe ask Karen in person next time you see her!

> > Its sad that misrepresented statements are why you have given up, instead of
> > talking to members of the alliance and what we do, and more importantly the how
> > consensus is reached.
> 
> So I don't believe they are misrepresented, because #1, a few years
> ago, in a hallway discussion, I've asked Bradley point blank whether
> the GPL or the long-term health of Linux development was more
> important to him, and he very candidly said "the GPL".  Props for him
> not dissembling, but this was not a case of my not understanding what
> he said.

My point was to disregard Bradley as what matters here for Linux is
what Linux developers part of the alliance care for and what you need
to do is talk to those involved. The Q&A would have been a perfect
opportunity you know...

I can only speak for myself so I'll say how I feel.

I care deeply over the long term development and health of the entire Linux
ecosystem, and above and beyond all things in the ecosystem I care mostly and
deeply about Linux. Since Linux is GPL I've been an advocate for it, since I
also care about the license it uses, because it gives both developers and uses
certain rights that I think are bad ass. So when it comes to "long-term health
of Linux development" -- this is subjective if we do not take into
consideration both the practical gains over open collaborative development and
the *freedoms* that come with Linux that we grant to both our developers and
users. So if you'd like we can get into specifics here. Please let me know if
you have any particular questions.

I encourage you to ask others involved similar questions.

> More importantly, #2, if you look at the 2016 linux.conf.au talk, it
> was quite unambiguous.  Trying to claim that there was
> misunderstanding or misrepresentation going on is roughly the same as
> Trump surrogates trying to claim that Donald Trump's very clear
> statements on Mexicans was all a misunderstanding pushed by the
> mainstream media.  But hey, don't take my word for it; listen to the
> talks for yourself and judge for yourself.

Yeah often, but not always, what Bradley says makes me cringe, so I joined
Conservancy to ensure I can voice my concerns and express exactly what I think
to him and all other developers.

> Maybe it was all rhetoric was for fundraising purposes, and wasn't
> actually meant "for real" (just as the claims that Trump's words about
> immigration was just to appeal to the Republic base, but it wasn't
> what he _really_ believes and he _really_ isn't a racist in his heart
> of hearts) --- but to the extent that Bradley is the face of "The
> Alliance" when he goes and pays visit to companies, the fact that he
> was making these statements just a few months ago doesn't help "The
> Alliance" and it certainly doesn't help Linux since it sows FUD to the
> companies who could just as easily decide to use a commercial OS like
> QNX, or another Open Source OS such as FreeBSD instead.

Agreed.

> (Never think you are irreplaceable; you aren't.  This is true just as
> much for programmers and employees, as it is for operating systems.)

Agreed.

  Luis