Re: (Censored) Why will no-one sue GrSecurity for their blatant GPL violation (of GCC and the linux kernel)?

[gameonlinux]

I have a law license, I don't need to read about who has standing to 
sue, and how to do so (Copyright Litigation (COPYLITG on Westlaw) is 
good enough for that).

I want to know why you guys (Fsf for the GCC plugins, and various kernel 
copyright holders for the kernel patch) will not sue GrSecurity, and why 
there is no discussion.

You just won't discuss this blatant foundational violation.

Why has my post been spam filtered/black holed.

On 2019-11-01 07:02, Jean Louis wrote:
> * address@hidden <address@hidden> [2019-11-01 00:03]:
> > I tried to send this to the list, but it was dropped as spam, which is 
> > no
> > surprise since the some want to screen communications to RMS and thus
> > control him.
>
> ... cut...
>
> > Wouldn't the FSF have standing regarding the GCC plugins atleast?
> > Couldn't you all rally linux-kernel copyright holders to bring a joint
> > action?
> >
> > References:
> > perens.com/2017/06/28/warning-grsecurity-potential-contributory-infringement-risk-for-customers/
> >
> > perens.com/static/OSS_Spenger_v_Perens/0_2018cv15189/docs1/pdf/18.pdf
> > (Page 10 onward of this brief gives a good recitation of the facts and
> > issues
>
> Recommended reads:
>
> Enforcing the GNU GPL by Eben Moglen
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html
>
> and
>
> The Principles of Community-Oriented GPL Enforcement by Joshua Gay
> https://www.fsf.org/licensing/enforcement-principles
>
> Jean