4 ms·

OK, Linus. So without lawyers, you know, the people who understand the legal system and matters involving legal instruments like licenses, how will you discuss

OK, Linus. So without lawyers, you know, the people who understand the legal system and matters involving legal instruments like licenses, how will you discuss GPL enforcement? Without people who know how to argue in courts, what will you do when sued? Will the Linux Foundation be representing itself pro se from now on? Are you going to send software engineers to explain to judges why they're smarter than lawyers, that is, the group of people to whom those judges belong and most clearly understand? "Lawyers are all uniformly evil and scary" is a canard. So is "all lawsuits are bad and unjustified." It is a gross misunderstanding of the legal system and a classic case of domain knowledge not equaling general knowledge. Linus Torvalds is a brilliant programmer, but as I've said before on this site, that does not make him like unto a god, and it doesn't excuse him this ignorance. Yes, sometimes lawsuits destroy. And certainly it is possible that the SFC and Bradley Kuhn are just as bad as he says... but he is making no proposals about what to replace them with. All I see is "boo lawyers suck" rhetoric and the usual Linus Torvalds arrogance and anger. > Lawsuits destroy community. They destroy trust. They would destroy all the goodwill we've built up over the years by being nice. Goodwill means nothing when the law is being broken. It means nothing when licenses are not being enforced. Lawsuits can be used and abused by The Man (TM), big corporations or government or whomever, but they can also be used by you to get recompense when you have been hurt. In fact, that's primarily what they're supposed to be for. One day, Linus may need the people who don't take litigation personally, who don't see it in terms of wrecking community but in terms of protecting communities. He's doing a great job now of alienating those people. The stance he's taken will make corporate sponsors love him, for sure - but that's because they'll see a guy who's scared of and angry at the system, but who also doesn't trust it enough to seek help. They'll see somebody who'd rather "be nice" and "build community" than protect what's theirs. (Ironic, given how outspoken Linus is about not being nice.) Then, they'll take it. (Edit: I removed a personal insult aimed at Linus. I need to practice what I preach.)

chrisbennet 10y ago
I didn't down-vote you but I don't think you "get it". Linus quotes Greg and explains why approaching it with lawyers does not have the desired outcome and offers example(s) of how effective the "behind the scenes"/"honey instead of vinegar" approach has been. "Goodwill means nothing when the law is being broken. It means nothing when licenses are not being enforced." This hasn't proven to be true with Linux/GPL. Look at the real world examples given in the article. Legal action is a tool but it is not the appropriate tool to convince another party to join you in a shared endeavor. You can "win" an argument with your wife by striking her but you have to ask yourself, is that the best way to reach your goal?
- ivraatiems 10y ago
  You're right - legal action is not always the best tool. And companies resort to it far more often than they ought to. But legal action != lawyers. Lawyers get involved all the time to make sure legal action doesn't happen. In fact, for civil lawyers, that's most of what they do. It's the frothing-at-the-mouth, "we must NEVER do this," all-lawyers-are-evil attitude that gets me here. If Linus had just said "I don't want to over-rely on legal action to get things done, I want to make sure we are not hurting our community relationships," that'd be one thing. But the way he comes at it - like he does with so many other things - is so inflammatory and my-way-or-the-highway that I felt a strong response was required.
slgeorge 10y ago
>> Lawsuits destroy community. They destroy trust. They would destroy all the goodwill we've built up over the years by being nice. > Goodwill means nothing when the law is being broken. It means nothing when licenses are not being enforced. Lawsuits can be used and abused by The Man (TM), big corporations or government or whomever, but they can also be used by you to get recompense when you have been hurt. You're right to say that there are some canards from Linus. In fact, each person in the email exchange frames their position at relative extremes - it's the nature of argument via email. But, he's got some very good points. To assume that an organisation of any size is monolitic in it's opinion is a problem and something that Linus' and Greg K-H's emails deals with well - there are always supporters and detractors for particular positions internally. It's also true that most organisations want to do the "right thing", but there are other constraints (whether those are cost, ignorance or fear) and barriers that have to be worked on. And, no-one likes to be threatened - threats of lawsuits whether direct or indirect change the nature of a conversation from being open to a risk assessment. > The stance he's taken will make corporate sponsors love him ... who'd rather "be nice" and "build community" than protect what's theirs As someone whose been part of a 'corporate sponsor' and who was responsible for compliance I personally don't think that's the case. Organisations are just people in a group - most of the people involved with FOSS want it to be successful and are involved because they chime with aspects of it's values. It's far better to assume that the person whose "doing it wrong" is mistaken or has problems than it is to assume they're being invidious: figuring out the 'how can we work together to get the right result?'. That's not to say that there aren't going to be some bad actors and that will need the threat or actual legal recourse. But it should be a long distant, last resort. Finally - there are definitely differences of opinion on what "doing it right" looks like. In the thread there are clear differences in beliefs about approach and what lessons past experiences show. And no one group has the gospel on "right" - SFDC, Linus or anyone else isn't the gospel of what various aspects of the licenses mean. That means there will always be discussions and compromise is required. If FOSS could get better at one thing, it would treating divergence in opinions as arguments amongst friends - rather than treating someone who doesn't agree as a total moron who should be burnt to a crisp in the fires of hades. Passion is great, but it has it's downsides!

chrisbennet 10y ago

I didn't down-vote you but I don't think you "get it". Linus quotes Greg and explains why approaching it with lawyers does not have the desired outcome and offers example(s) of how effective the "behind the scenes"/"honey instead of vinegar" approach has been. "Goodwill means nothing when the law is being broken. It means nothing when licenses are not being enforced." This hasn't proven to be true with Linux/GPL. Look at the real world examples given in the article. Legal action is a tool but it is not the appropriate tool to convince another party to join you in a shared endeavor. You can "win" an argument with your wife by striking her but you have to ask yourself, is that the best way to reach your goal?

ivraatiems 10y ago
You're right - legal action is not always the best tool. And companies resort to it far more often than they ought to. But legal action != lawyers. Lawyers get involved all the time to make sure legal action doesn't happen. In fact, for civil lawyers, that's most of what they do. It's the frothing-at-the-mouth, "we must NEVER do this," all-lawyers-are-evil attitude that gets me here. If Linus had just said "I don't want to over-rely on legal action to get things done, I want to make sure we are not hurting our community relationships," that'd be one thing. But the way he comes at it - like he does with so many other things - is so inflammatory and my-way-or-the-highway that I felt a strong response was required.

slgeorge 10y ago

>> Lawsuits destroy community. They destroy trust. They would destroy all the goodwill we've built up over the years by being nice. > Goodwill means nothing when the law is being broken. It means nothing when licenses are not being enforced. Lawsuits can be used and abused by The Man (TM), big corporations or government or whomever, but they can also be used by you to get recompense when you have been hurt. You're right to say that there are some canards from Linus. In fact, each person in the email exchange frames their position at relative extremes - it's the nature of argument via email. But, he's got some very good points. To assume that an organisation of any size is monolitic in it's opinion is a problem and something that Linus' and Greg K-H's emails deals with well - there are always supporters and detractors for particular positions internally. It's also true that most organisations want to do the "right thing", but there are other constraints (whether those are cost, ignorance or fear) and barriers that have to be worked on. And, no-one likes to be threatened - threats of lawsuits whether direct or indirect change the nature of a conversation from being open to a risk assessment. > The stance he's taken will make corporate sponsors love him ... who'd rather "be nice" and "build community" than protect what's theirs As someone whose been part of a 'corporate sponsor' and who was responsible for compliance I personally don't think that's the case. Organisations are just people in a group - most of the people involved with FOSS want it to be successful and are involved because they chime with aspects of it's values. It's far better to assume that the person whose "doing it wrong" is mistaken or has problems than it is to assume they're being invidious: figuring out the 'how can we work together to get the right result?'. That's not to say that there aren't going to be some bad actors and that will need the threat or actual legal recourse. But it should be a long distant, last resort. Finally - there are definitely differences of opinion on what "doing it right" looks like. In the thread there are clear differences in beliefs about approach and what lessons past experiences show. And no one group has the gospel on "right" - SFDC, Linus or anyone else isn't the gospel of what various aspects of the licenses mean. That means there will always be discussions and compromise is required. If FOSS could get better at one thing, it would treating divergence in opinions as arguments amongst friends - rather than treating someone who doesn't agree as a total moron who should be burnt to a crisp in the fires of hades. Passion is great, but it has it's downsides!