Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

FSF Publishes Important Whitepaper on Secure Boot - Ubuntu Got It Wrong on Grub and GPLv3 ~pj | 474 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

FSF Publishes Important Whitepaper on Secure Boot - Ubuntu Got It Wrong on Grub and GPLv3 ~pj

Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 12:16 PM EDT

No. You do misunderstand. Canonical misunderstood
how the GPLv3 works. FSF would trump Canonical,
because Stallman and the FSF came up with the GPL.
Plus FSF is the copyright holder of Grub, which
is released under the GPLv3, the license at issue.

So what FSF says about the GPL is like having it
written on stone tablets, so to speak. They are
the source for understanding how the GPL works.

So for Canonical to say they are "afraid" of
obligations under the GPLv3 when the copyright holder
and creator of the GPL says they don't need to
be afraid, is dispositive. It's not a business
issue. It's a legal issue, and Canonical is wrong.
They can do what they want, but they can't pretend
it's about fears of GPLv3, because they have no
legal basis for their alleged fears.

I say alleged, because Canonical has lawyers who
understand the GPL, in my experience, so I am
less willing to act like it's an honest mistake.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

FSF Publishes Important Whitepaper on Secure Boot - Ubuntu Got It Wrong on Grub and GPLv3 ~pj - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 12:35 PM EDT
FSF Publishes Important Whitepaper on Secure Boot - Ubuntu Got It Wrong on Grub and GPLv3 ~pj - Authored by: PolR on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 03:07 PM EDT
- FSF Publishes Important Whitepaper on Secure Boot - Ubuntu Got It Wrong on Grub and GPLv3 ~pj - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 03:48 PM EDT
  - FSF Publishes Important Whitepaper on Secure Boot - Ubuntu Got It Wrong on Grub and GPLv3 ~pj - Authored by: PolR on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 04:14 PM EDT
    - The only thing I have seen is this - Authored by: pem on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 04:34 PM EDT
      - The only thing I have seen is this - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 04:57 PM EDT
        link - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 04:58 PM EDT
        So how is that different than what I said? - Authored by: pem on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 05:23 PM EDT
        Sorry, I misread you - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 05:27 PM EDT
  - located the links to Canonical's position - Authored by: PolR on Tuesday, July 03 2012 @ 04:41 PM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )