News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on I will not sign the CLA for less than $100, payable in Bitcoins in advance. Parent comment

Re:I will not sign the CLA for less than $100, payable in Bi... by mjg59 on Monday April 06, 2015 @12:18PM (#9328895)
> If you don't, to make your case you have to round up virtually everyone who has ever contributed to your project because they are copyright holders too.

This is demonstrably untrue - all the Linux kernel GPL enforcement cases have been brought by individuals without involving any other kernel copyright holders.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:I will not sign the CLA for less than $100, payable in Bi... by Blackthorn on Monday April 06, 2015 @12:20PM (#9328910)
Which cases? Help add to my knowledge and I'll gladly admit I'm wrong here -- every successful GPL infringement case I know of was from Busybox.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:I will not sign the CLA for less than $100, payable in Bi... by mjg59 on Monday April 06, 2015 @12:26PM (#9328955)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gpl-violations.org#Notable_vict... covers a couple. But Busybox works just as well here - it doesn't have a CLA and only one of the original authors is involved in recent cases.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:I will not sign the CLA for less than $100, payable in Bi... by Blackthorn on Monday April 06, 2015 @12:42PM (#9329053)
This is awesome -- happy to admit I'm wrong on this point and CLAs may not be needed. I'm curious if any victories like this exist in the USA.
[ Parent | on HN ]