How not to handle a licensing violation

Posted Apr 12, 2007 23:55 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190)
In reply to: How not to handle a licensing violation by bfields
Parent article: How not to handle a licensing violation

That's not what I said, is it? You're talking about going to a delegate; I'm talking about intepreting silence negatively.

So to put the orchard back: Would you be so happy if whoever went to someone else who could sort the problem out did so with the words "bfields stole our code on purpose, can you sort them out please?"? And that the someone else in question took the assertion at face value and sacked you?

to post comments

How not to handle a licensing violation

Posted Apr 13, 2007 16:37 UTC (Fri) by bfields (subscriber, #19510) [Link]

That's not what I said, is it? You're talking about going to a delegate; I'm talking about intepreting silence negatively.

Well, you did say "I'd also expect you to wait for me to reply". That's not something I'd expect--if you have an urgent issue (and discovering that I was publicly distributing code with serious license issues would count), I'd definitely prefer that you go to whoever you need to (including people "over my head") to get the problem solved if I don't reply promptly, rather than wait some indefinite length of time with the problem unsolved.

Would you be so happy if whoever went to someone else who could sort the problem out did so with the words "bfields stole our code on purpose, can you sort them out please?"?

Why would I care?

Anyway, I don't see that in the original message; was that something that was said later in the flamewar?

And that the someone else in question took the assertion at face value and sacked you?

And here I'm totally lost. Was Marcus sacked? Who was taking anything at "face value"? What does this have to do with who problem reports should be addressed to?