Suddenly Bruce Perens doesn't want to talk to me.
What happened? This was out of the blue:
Suddenly Bruce Perens doesn't want to talk to me
Aaron James
Other urls found in this thread:
perens.com
linux.slashdot.org
twitter.com
twitter.com
lists.debian.org
lists.dyne.org
lists.debian.org
lists.dyne.org
koolkidsklub.tech
lists.dyne.org
lists.debian.org
oxwugzccvk3dk6tj.onion
twitter.com
Blake Davis
Tell me what's going on.
This was from a discussion on the GRSecurity situation.
Wyatt Gray
someone spoke to him off list and told him to shut up most likely
Lincoln Carter
My response:
For what reason? Has some libel been spread about me? Who are you saying OK to? It seems that you are putting me in a false negative light now for what reason is there for blocking me? I have not been combative towards you and have simply explained the law as I see it regarding this situation, as-well as anticipating possible defenses that will have to be argued against.
I don't see why, for that, one would block me.
So there must be some libelous statement made by someone else that you are responding to. I wonder what was said...
Anyway, yes I am a licensed attorney. Yes I have answered the questions and ideas raised as best as I can, and yes I have informed those in this discussion, as-well as those reading it, as to the dangers of failing to bring a case within a reasonable amount of time once a cause of action has matured.
I have done my due diligence.
If you do not bring a case within the required time period, at law, you lose the right to seek damages. If you do not bring a case within a reasonable time and sit on your rights then equitable remedies also will be barred by laches.
William Thompson
Imprisonment for contempt of court is not per-se a criminal matter. It is a situation where one can, at any time, comply with the court's request and regain one's liberty.
Cases involving repeated imprisonment for contempt of court include most often failure to pay a payment in a domestic matter (child support), as-well as increasingly failure to disburse funds in an action related to debt collection. Neither of such cases are matters of criminal law.
Your assertion that I am conflating the two is incorrect.
I gave it as an example to head off the idea that a court would look fondly on a plaintiff that stat on his rights and then attempted to head off a latches defense by claiming he could not afford council. Such is not a legal or physical impairment that a court would likely accept in most jurisdictions.
Why you now block me I do not know.
Give examples of a court in Pennsylvania (where Open Source Security is incorporated and has it's head office) where a latches defense failed because the plaintiff alleged that when he should have commenced an action he was short of funding.
Easton Stewart
Do you think someone tipped him off that I feel that Hans Reiser did nothing wrong, and that I support the book of Deuteronomy, especially Deuteronomy chapter 22 verse 28-29 (as written in hebrew) and am infavor of men taking young girls as brides (as allowed by the God of the Old Testament) am not a fan of women's rights, etc?
He was listening to me (for over a week), posted this:
perens.com
after my explanation of the law
which became this slashdot story (in which he comments):
And then suddenly an hour or two ago, poof,
These are the people that were cc'd
Cc [email protected]/* */, [email protected]/* */, Eric Raymond, [email protected]/* */ contact
Which one do you think caused this?
I suspect ESR myself...
Your thoughts?
Do you think he'll now issue a retraction of his article, even though my understanding of the law is correct?
Nicholas Thompson
Why? And why the "I will block further emails from "aconcernedfossdev" and no longer encourage him."
Jose Thompson
Why this:
"I will block further emails from "aconcernedfossdev" and no longer encourage him."
Nothing I said warrants that. I was explaining the law and anticipating the defense's arguments. Which is what you are supposed to do.
Bentley Butler
Any ideas?
William Russell
Bruce Perens @BrucePerens 4h4 hours ago
@elonmusk It's OK, Elon. Tweets that are just weird are fine. You aren't hiding behind a secret service guard while tweeting abuse at women.
twitter.com
White Knight
Levi Gomez
Pax Team's legal analysis: Red Hat does something similar, thus we're in the clear!
twitter.com
------
GPL v2
Section 6 states simply
"You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein."
From GRSecurity's "Stable Patch Agreement":
"Notwithstanding these rights and obligations, the User acknowledges that redistribution of the provided stable patches or changelogs outside of the explicit obligations under the GPL to User's customers will result in termination of access to future updates of grsecurity stable patches and changelogs."
Clear as day. What some lay people do not understand is that the terms in section 6 are governing what agreements and actions the distributee can take regarding furthur distributees, in reality, in the flesh.
Here the ACTIONS of GRSecurity are to RESTRICT the exercise of the redistribution rights of the further distributee.
This is an action prohibited by the terms offered by the linux-rights holders, and they have written as another term that the permission they give to use their property is revoked upon violation of their terms.
Very simple.
(Someone previously said on another thread:)
The proffering of the additional restrictive terms is in and of itself a violation of section 2. You are holding the clients to an additional restriction and enforcing this restriction via a threat to suspend business relationships.
(YES YOU HAVE IMPOSED AN ADDITIONAL RESTRICTION)
Gabriel Nelson
sage
Colton Adams
No, they don't.
Red Hat distributes all of their software freely. You can go download the source, and fork it.
The additional conditions Red Hat puts on their source code are simply a matter of trademark.
Stallman has already stated that trademarks are a different matter than copyright. You cannot take Red Hat, and repackage it to sell it as "Red Hat Linux." You are violating their trademark protection.
Also, are you MikeeUSA? Your autism closely matches his. The same pseudo-legal bullshit. Why are you sperging out about Perens correct legal analysis of the GRSecurity situation? He's right, they're violating the GPL. That much is clear. You cannot threaten someone to not redistribute the source after they've received the patch sets.
Isaac Brown
Actually, it's not even a question at this point. You are MikeeUSA.
Listen, dipshit. Perens is right. I'm not sure why this triggers you, but now that I think about it, you did have some infatuation with GRSecurity. No wonder you're sucking Spengler's dick.
There's no legal argument to be made. They're violating GPL section six states "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein."
But, the GPL allows you to add certain supplemental terms, like the following:
a) Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the [corresponding terms of GPLv3]; or
b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author attributions in that materiathe Appropriate Legal Notices displayed by works containing it; or
c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in reasonable ways as different from the original version; or
d) Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or authors of the material; or
e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or
f) Requiring indemnification of licensors and authors of that material by anyone who conveys the material (or modified versions of it) with contractual assumptions of liability to the recipient, for any liability that these contractual assumptions directly impose on those licensors and authors.
You're not a lawyer, MikeeUSA. You're a shitskin who fantasizes about raping little girls. Please stop shitting up Holla Forums.
Robert Bennett
Glad other people are around to explain this narcissist's mannerisms. The "I, I, I" like anyone gives a fuck was a dead giveaway.
Nicholas Johnson
lmao no law degree
Ryan Clark
You seem to lack reading comprehension.
Pax Claims on twitter that "Red Hat does the same thing" and thus they are in the clear. Yes they are wrong. Even if Red Hat did do the same thing Pax still wouldn't be in the clear:
Second: I was talking to Bruce Perens for weeks and others for months. I induced Perens to write that article by explaining to him what GRSecurity was doing and how they were violating the license.
If you read it you'll see parts of my language from earlier (in the month) writings of my own.
And Yes I do have a Law Degree, and Yes I am a licensed attorney.
Gabriel Morgan
Notice the date:
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:41:56 +0000
lists.debian.org
Bruce published his article on the 27th.
lists.debian.org
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:50:54 -0700
Who do you think "A Concerned Foss Developer" is?
Incorrect
Correct
Incorrect
Deuteronomy chapter 22, verse 28-29, hebrew.
He is.
I've been campaigning against them for over a year.
As a stupid white man, your reading comprehension is about where one would expect.
Camden Mitchell
Perens blocked me after I started brainstorming what procedural hurdles GRSecurity might put in the way of a successful suit, and what affirmitive defenses they might raise. He said "uh they can't do laches because programmers have no money and will claim that as a counter to laches". As if a court would accept that from a middle class programmer as a counterargument to laches when an equitable remedy is asked of the court. He then linked me to a wikipedia page on laches that he read.
I explained to him that the court will only take into account physical, mental, or legal deficits (being a minor), not "I can't afford a lawyer", since one can simply represent oneself. (Also note: There is no civil right to council, not for defense, and certainly not for a plaintiff)
He didn't like what I had to say.
He said to another person this:
Bruce is not a lawyer. I am. One has to anticipate the opposition's arguments.
Liam Perez
What's the deal
Easton Brown
Notice the idiot PROUD AMERICAN WHITE MMMAAAANNNNN had no counter so didn't respond to this:
He made himself look like a fool "Bruce is right, you are wrooonng!". Yes Bruce is right, and I am right; we agree and I induced him to write the article.
He seemingly knows little about the next step though: to prepare a case, and blocked me once I started brainstorming the defenses the opposition will mount. Never giving a reason only that I am a "fool". He was asked to give examples and counters to my arguments but he did not. He comes off as arrogant, but those who do not know, do not know what they do not know.
Jaxon Gomez
No response White Man?
Levi Thompson
What the fuck is going on in this thread? Did SJWs finally find Holla Forums or something?
Henry Allen
So far:
lists.dyne.org
Why am I being stonewalled from the discussion now?
I started the discussion, now because you all believe Bruce Peren's
libel that I "don't know what I'm talking about" (after he wrote an
article based on my council...) and his public sanction against me
because HE didn't understand the importance of brainstorming any and all
likely arguments from the other side (because HE is brought in as an
expert witness only once an action is well underway and doesn't witness
the work that is done in bringing a case forward from a cold start), I
am no longer included in the conversation.
I feel I've been wronged and I am very angry about it.
lists.debian.org
-----
lists.dyne.org
Author: Se7en
Date: 2017-07-25 03:39 UTC
To: dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Why am I being stonewalled (GRSecurity discussion)?
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 03:18:25AM +0000, aconcernedfossdev@??? wrote:
So you were kicked out of a discussion thread for being weird, you go
to Holla Forums to complain, they figure out you're a sockpuppet of
MikeeeUSA, and then you leave there and come to the devuan mailing
list and don't even put OT in the subject header.
Mikeee, you're a weirdo and outside of maybe 10 people no one thinks
you are even competent.
--
|-----/ | Se7en
/ The One and Only! | se7en@???
/ | 0x73518A15BA3C1476
/ | koolkidsklub.tech
---
lists.dyne.org
Author: aconcernedfossdev
Date: 2017-07-25 08:12 UTC
To: Se7en
CC: dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Why am I being stonewalled (GRSecurity discussion)?
I was responding to this by Bradley M. Kuhn:
lists.debian.org
Explaining why resting on ones rights is a very inadvisable move.
Laches will bar you from equitable relief after a time, the statute of
limitations for the claim will bar you from relief under law (money
damages).
Bruce then made a claim of "well a programmer could claim they had no
money to hire a lawyer". I said that a court would not be impressed by a
plaintiff making such an argument.
For that I get stonewalled and libeled.
I also started to brainstorm various defenses the opposition might
bring. This offended Bruce (who, BTW, lets everyone know that he is not
a lawyer.)
We are not supposed to anticipate an opponents moves apparently...
As for competence.
I am competent at making 3d video game maps.
I am competent at 3d modeling.
I am competent at game code programming.
I am competent at argument to help induce you to fork Debian.
I am competent at inducing Bruce Perens to publish an advisory regarding
GRSecurity and it's copyright violation, which was my goal.
What do you find me incompetent in?
On 2017-07-25 03:39, Se7en wrote:
Adam Powell
The white man is the SJW. The white man (anglo) banned child marraige and made the world safe for white (anglo) women
Cooper Perez
Isaac Wilson
What is new here?
Lincoln Thompson
bump