Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
> David Woodhouse wrote:
>> To claim that there is no _legal_ basis for such a restriction is also
>> incorrect. Nothing but the GPL gives you the right to distribute the
>> Linux kernel. If the GPL has conditions with which you fail to comply,
>> then you may not distribute the Linux kernel.
> I'm not sure why you'd consider being unable to distribute the Linux
> kernel to be a desirable thing,
Since he said no such thing, it is pretty rude to claim that. This is
undesirable tactics in a argument that is being used repeatedly.
Sorry, if I misunderstood. When someone describes an alternative to
promote their argument, I assume they are promoting the alternative as
well. But what did that mean if it's not what he wants?