> Now if you're saying Red Hat should allow the use of its copyright on the kernel as leverage in all GPL enforcement cases, well, yes, probably it should, morally speaking. It's a little difficult to justify that to the shareholders, I expect, since that's a lot of lawyer time for no increase in revenue. But if you can come up with a way to do it I bet there's some counsel that would love to talk to you.
No need for Red Hat to spend any of its own lawyers' time. More than one organization exists which would happily spend its own lawyers' time on GPL enforcement on Red Hat's behalf. Any reason not to do that?
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-01-31 12:17 pm (UTC)No need for Red Hat to spend any of its own lawyers' time. More than one organization exists which would happily spend its own lawyers' time on GPL enforcement on Red Hat's behalf. Any reason not to do that?