ESR keeps his mouth shut.

To: esr@thyrsus.com

Nothing more to say? You just keep your mouth shut because you quake
in the knees at the thought of a BS libel suit from Grsec and just
want peace in your old age, while RMS tilts at windmills regarding
topics such as "Am I a Real Doctor" and "What /SHOULD/ The age of
consent REALLY be: my musings over the years" and never "Hmm what of
these blatant copyright violations that stab at the very heart of my
movement?"

Guess you're happy in you irrelevancy: which comes because you don't
do what you used to do.

>My take is that my opinion doesn't matter a hill of beans, as I am
>not in a position to sue Grsecurity. Linus and the FSF have all the
>resources they need to be in this fight, assuming theyu want to be.
-

>If the ppeople with skin in this game and the money to hire lawyers to
>fight Grsecurity aren't willing to step up on the facts you've already
>presented, nothing I say will make them.

>I don't shrink from a fight, but I choose my battles carefully. This
>doesn't look to me like a good one to be in.

-

>I have never thought GPL-style reciprocal licensing was very important
>to the success of open source, and never use it for new work myself.
>That I hold this opinion is no secret and I'm surprised you didn't
>know it. It does mean I will be much less upset than you if somebody
>breaks the GPL.

>You're ignoring several important secondary effects that do in fact
>provide rewards for releasing.

>But I'm not going to argue this point in detail, because I need to
>make money today. With an open-source tool I released (reposurgeon)
>that generates consulting contracts for me.


He won't say shit about grsec. He's afraid of getting sued or "doesn't care". Now he won't respond to my emails. Just like Richard Matthew Stallman won't respond to anything regarding grsec.

They're fucking frauds.

To: esr@thyrsus.com
Look at the economics from the Programmers* perspective:
If he is to set aside the enormous time and effort it takes to write a
program** he has to get something out of it.

0) "To scratch an itch" can be one of those things
But why even ever release the program in that case? It makes no
economic sense to the programmer: he already has what he wanted to
create: by his own hand; there is little reason to release it to
others.

1) To be paid in the labor of others (should they choose use the
product of his labor)
Constructively; This is why the GPL exists (especially according to
Linus, who was always adamant about "getting contributions back"): to
be paid in /kind/ instead of fiat or currency.

That is: though forgoing direct monetary remuneration: the programmer,
by choosing a share-alike license is targeting remuneration in the
form of being able to access any changes and improvements made to his
Work. That is his pay.

That's why OpenSouce exploded: because programmers believed that they
would have their hobby projects improved. This makes sense to the
high-school and undergrad college kids who actually start the
opensource projects; which later grow and grow because of the
share-alike understanding. Linus started his kernel in the same way:
during the same stage of life.

Linus hammered home time and time again that: everything's fine
as-long as the code is open. In video, in written correspondence, for
decades. So much so you could argue in court that the Standard
Practice of the "Linux"(Kernel) industry is incorporated into the
terms. Grsecurity has violated both the text of the GPL license, and
the instructions Linus has given; and the understanding that all the
programmers who voluntarily contributed their labor to Linux: and the
wider OpenSouce movement.

This choice... is not being honored. Not anymore.

ESR says I'm wrong about reasons to even make something opensource at all:

Look at the economics from the Programmers* perspective:
If he is to set aside the enormous time and effort it takes to write a
program** he has to get something out of it.
0) "To scratch an itch" can be one of those things
But why even ever release the program in that case? It makes no
economic sense to the programmer: he already has what he wanted to
create: by his own hand; there is little reason to release it to
others.

>You're ignoring several important secondary effects that do in fact
>provide rewards for releasing.

>But I'm not going to argue this point in detail, because I need to
>make money today. With an open-source tool I released (reposurgeon)
>that generates consulting contracts for me.

To: esr@thyrsus.com
This is what everyone says about RMS and others (linus, you, all the
known opensource guys etc) not commenting on Grsecurity:

>>81349245
"they won't pick your battle because they know it's a losing one
grsec isn't violating copyrights and isn't violating the GPL "

IE: Silence is consent. You don't want to say anything because you
don't want to be sued for libel like Bradly Spengler sued Bruce
Perens. Same with RMS. Either Grsecurity is right or All of you
opensource speakers are scared old men. RMS speaks of _EVERYTHING_
_OTHER_ than enforcing his freesoftware vision anymore. You can try
it: email rms@gnu.org on ANY topic: he'll respond. Mention Grsecurity:
he won't.

You're afraid of losing money. So you won't say anything. This is a
betrayal. Your words roped us all into this opensource thing; and you
won't back it up after we did all that work induced by you, linus,
RMS, etc. ONLY Bruce Perens has the balls to put his money where his
mouth is, out of all of you.

And yes: When you induce people to do work based on a promise of
enforcement (ex: linus) (also RMS (gcc plugins are involved in this
aswell, and RMS explicitly induced copyright transfers on condition
that the copyrights would be defended: which they are not being)) you
are liable for that.

Also all that money you made today isn't actually money.
If a weel cannot roll is it a wheel?
Money cannot buy what it was originally invented for (such is
forbidden). You're not being paid squat.

To: esr@thyrsus.com
This is what everyone agrees on: Grsecurity can do as it pleases with
your code.

Or to put it in more concrete terms:
(Quote):
- - -
Look, when Grsecurity decideds to add additional terms between it and
it's customers: that's a business decision, protected by American
Business Law. Your copyright bullshit doesn't override that.

Sure, if Grsecurity was operating as a charity it might have to abide
by the linux kernel license and not add additional terms when
distributing it's changes to the linux kernel and the compiler.

But it's not. It's operating as a Business. It can add any additional
terms it wants when distributing for pay to it's Customers. This is a
Fundamental american freedom as confirmed by the Supreme Court.

Additionally Grsecurity did it's due dilligence by having an attorney
from the Patent Bar look over it's business plan and the Patent Bar
attorney found no copyright problems: American Business law gives an
absolute right to conduct Business with whatever customers one wants
to; and to cut off any customers one wants to at anytime: INCLUDING as
a forewarned penalty if an act of redistribution to non-customers
occurs.

It doesn't matter what linus' copyright rights are to his work, nor
what his license supposidly allows. American Business Law allows
Grsecurity to add whatever additional terms it wants to when working
with IT'S CUSTOMERS. It has chosen to add: No redistribution, Forum is
Penn. State, Law is Penn. Law, No liability if penalty for illicit
redistribution is enacted.

Grsecurity has the RIGHT to protect it's PROPERTY: which are the
changes it has chosen to make to the Linux Kernel and the GCC
compiler. It does NOT matter what linus thinks his copyright means. It
doesn't mean anything.

Which is WHY linus hasn't spoken up: He knows he has no legs to stand
on: his copyright isn't worth trash. Same with RMS and the Free
Software Foundation and their GCC compiler: Their copyright isn't
worth trash.

All Programmers Agr

To: esr@thyrsus.com

Codes of conduct weren't part of the agreement, nor was allowing
violators to do as they please. Alot of us are starting to really hate
Linus. A real boiling hatread for him.

He hasn't responded since his "I'm making money!" reply. (No he isn't: the original use for money is to purchase men's young daughters for marraige: which is forbidden.

ESR is gay and is too old for your lollies.

>>9
ESR doesn't like lolis. I don't understand why.

>>10

He is just a huge faggot.

>>11
Should he be punished for not liking lolis?
Why does he curse people out every time he communicates with them?
Why does he think "I'm getting paid" is a valid argument?
Why does he think he's getting paid money at all? Money was made to buy little girls. What he's getting can't do that.

>>12
Normies should be killed. Every single of them.

>>13
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YN39bvtMJ3s

ESR defends communism and pedophilia:
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8415

There are Communists who are capable programmers

>>15
He can't even figure out how to get his fucking site working...