On Thu, October 25, 2012 10:32 am, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 AM, Patrick Shirkey
wrote:
In this case Fairlight may just not be aware of their
explicit legal
obligations. No one knows unless they ask. I don't see any harm if,
for
example the Consortium sends a generic letter by email and physical
copy
alerting them of their legal obligations and outlining the positive
aspects of doing the "Right Thing" (tm)
That would be very nice and human. </sarcasm>
Please explain why it would be a negative thing for the Consortium to
take
on such a role?
Would you prefer for random people with no specific affiliation to do
the
job or would you prefer for it to not be done at all?
Are you suggesting that there is nothing to be gained from politely
alerting companies of their legal obligations before they get into
trouble?
In the first place, I'm suggesting that you stop using "we as
community" and go back to the honest "I as a person".
Is this not a community mailing list?
Having said that, I quite admire how you can keep your
face straight
while suggesting to "alert companies of their legal obligations before
they get into trouble" by using an organization (FSF) whose primary
function is to get companies into trouble over breach of GPL terms.
You're confused because I have stated several times already that IMO it is
more useful for the Consortium to take on that role.
Gene suggested that it might be something for the FSF to look into. I
think that the Consortium could save some time and hassle and increase
goodwill by reaching out to companies and businesses that use Linux Audio
and Open Source Software.
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd