Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
From: Valdis . Kletnieks
Date: Thu Jun 14 2007 - 00:01:27 EST
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 04:56:40 +0200, Adrian Bunk said:
> Reality check:
> Harald convinced companies that they have to provide the private keys
> required to run the Linux kernel they ship on their hardware.
No, the *real* reality check:
The operative words here are "convinced companies" - as opposed to "convinced
a judge to rule that private keys are required to be disclosed". (I just
checked around on gpl-violations.org, and I don't see any news items that say
they actually generated citable case law on the topic of keys...)
Harald convinced companies that it was easier/cheaper/faster to provide the
private keys than to continue in a long legal battle with an uncertain outcome.
If the company estimates the total loss due to keys being released is US$100K,
but the costs of taking it to court are estimated at US$200K, it's obviously
a win (lesser loss, actually) for the company to just fold.
Incidentally, this same logic is what drives the average successful patent
troll lawsuit - the sued company will buy a license for $25K, just because
they know that fighting the lawsuit will cost $100K and up.
Description: PGP signature