[sf-lug] RMS Sues Cisco

[Rick Moen]

I wrote:

> I gather, therefore, that Cisco/Linksys have been stomping all over
> FSF's copyrights, were failing to comply with FSF's software's terms
> of use, and need some remedial court-administered lessons on the
> definition of private property.

LWN subscribers can read an _excellent_ analysis of the underlying
situation, published today.  (Others can wait eight days or, better yet,
subscribe already!)  http://lwn.net/Articles/311142/

Quotation, aspiring to fair use:

   The sad part is that there is almost certainly no real desire on the
   part of Cisco or Linksys to violate the GPL. The company is being set up
   for trouble by its suppliers - the firms based in the far east that
   actually make the hardware sold under the Linksys name.  Those suppliers
   feel, perhaps with good reason, that they need not concern themselves
   with the details of license compliance.

(Give yourself the $WINTER_HOLIDAY present of LWN, if you don't
subscribe already.  They deserve your support, and you deserve quality
reporting.)

And... Phillip?  Isn't it more than a little facile to suggest
Richard Stallman's somehow being unreasonable when FSF tries to enforce
the -- extremely generous -- licence terms on its own software against 
people who've committed plain, unambiguous copyright violation?

You work for Penguin Computing, right?  Don't you know better, then?