Greg KH using Microsoft-style FUD to attack "non-free"? (was Re: video cards)

[Leo Mauler]

--- Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:

> On Friday 04 April 2008, Leo Mauler wrote:
>
> > The paragraph immediately following your 
> > quote was rather enlightening (emphasis 
> > mine):
> >
> > "Now **no lawyer will ever come out in 
> > public and say this, as lawyer really aren't 
> > allowed to make public statements like this 
> > at all**. But **if you hire one**, and talk 
> > to them in the client/lawyer setting, they 
> > will advise you of this issue."
> >
> > I am not convinced by an argument that 
> > stipulates that the people who told Greg that 
> > "kernel modules are illegal" will NEVER VERIFY 
> > THIS AS TRUE unless you pay them lots of money 
> > to tell you the same thing, and even then they 
> > can't legally discuss in public what you've 
> > talked about in private.
> 
> In case you never noticed, nobody will ever give
> free legal advice on the record. Probably for 
> fear of being held liable if they end up wrong 
> and having had no profit from the statement. But 
> there is nothing GPL-specific or even 
> copyright-specific to lack of public legal
> statements.

This still means that IP Lawyers haven't yet weighed
in on the subject of "closed source Linux drivers". 
All we have are the opinions of people who aren't IP
Lawyers, and Greg KH's non-IP-Lawyer group seems to be
composed largely of himself and his undocumentable hearsay.


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.  
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com