I know this wasn't addressed to me, but the advice I gave (about binary
Linux Kernel Modules) was cross-checked with the legal department of
that company, the legal department of the client AND with FSF, so don't
think you alone are right because you hired a lawyer.
Any lawyer will say "stay away from the gray areas.", you don't need to
pay for that kind of nonsense. You pay them to tell you exactly what is
black and what is white, if they fail to do that, you've been ripped
off.
Nobody is forcing you to give free advice, so if you don't want to,
stop it. I have nothing to do with this all as worst case I'll build my
own OpenOCD with FTD2xx support, I'm just thinking about the "greater
good" and putting my time in this to make OpenOCD succeed. The moment I
stop caring about that I'll stop writing posts about this and move on.
gr.
Ronald
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Openocd-development] [windows + openocd] GPL implementation
of libd2xx.dll ?
From: Zach Welch <z...@superlucidity.net>
To: Pavel Chromy <chr...@asix.cz>
Cc: openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
Date: Sat Jun 27 2009 00:38:46 GMT+0200 (Romance Standard Time)
On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 16:32 +0200, Pavel Chromy wrote:
[snip]
No offense but isn't this sort of GPL madness?
Yes. This is completely insane: that you would continue to ask me for
advice that should be best answered by legal counsel. I am not a lawyer
and cannot give you the advice that you need, but virtually everything
that you saw thrown at this argument from me was received from one long
ago (and I paid the bills).
This community has received nothing but free advice on this topic from
me, in consideration of your feelings. I am under no obligation to
educate you, and I am getting increasingly frustrated by the fact that
everyone seems to think they are right. Each individual must now
measure my commitment to the GPL and judge how willing I am going to be
to try to defend my rights in OpenOCD, in light of the understanding
that I have have presented to date on this list.
Please. The debate is over; legal counsel is unavoidable for you,
unless you wish to demonstrate _further_ negligence. I do not care what
any individual here thinks any longer; unless _you_ are licensed to
practice law, you need a qualified lawyers to assess this situation and
give you real advice. I have been relaying what I paid mine to tell me
years ago, you are getting that knowledge for free, but it is being
challenged and questioned. Fine: go pay for your own legal advice.
Again, you will continue to be negligent should anyone making money from
OpenOCD do anything less than this. I can assure you that they will
tell you -- very clearly -- that you should try to avoid any gray areas
in the GPL. You are welcome to disregard our advice in this area, but
it would be taking a big risk to do so. You could be putting you
long-term business interests in legal jeopardy, and I am actually
helping to protect your interests in this regard. I should be thanked.
Cheers,
Zach
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
|
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
