Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements

Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:04 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510)
In reply to: Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements by LinuxLobbyist
Parent article: Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements

Have you asked him?

When the piece first came to my attention, it bore the proper date. I discussed the piece with Russ at LinuxWorld. He did not present it as an old piece that people had to dig up to defame him. And I don't think you seriously believe that the piece was written at 00:00 on 1 January 2001. Look at the time on the bottom of the page. It's obviously an epochal date for the software being used.

Did you suggest to this CEO that he contact Russ

The response of that CEO and the response I heard indirectly from a VP of a big company was that because of the incident, they didn't want to deal with him any longer.

It's why I never paid much attention to what seemed like ESR's Christian-bashing to me.

Well, I'm glad it doesn't bother you, but you're already converted to our cause. I was very uncomfortable with Eric's issue-mixing and did feel that it caused us harm.

yet they won't check the comments out for themselves and engage in some honest communication with the supposed offender

I think they did check the comments out for themselves. I believe their response was not to the nature of Russ' comment but to the fact that someone who would make such a comment in a public venue was a major political liability to Open Source. In the companies where those folks worked, what Russ wrote would have gotten a person fired, and their response to us was "get rid of that guy". Of course I wasn't in a position to do anything about that except to attempt to impress upon Russ the importance of the situation.

Bruce

Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements

Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:22 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] (1 responses)

Points taken. You've certainly expended more effort in this debate than some people who still choose to cowardly remain nameless. Thanks for your reasoned insight.

And I don't think you seriously believe that the piece was written at 00:00 on 1 January 2001.

Heh. I didn't think much of the date, but I didn't notice the time.

The response of that CEO and the response I heard indirectly from a VP of a big company was that because of the incident, they didn't want to deal with him any longer.

Well, that's their own prerogatives, but it still begs the question of whether or not they were depending on what other people were saying about what Russ was saying.

I believe their response was not to the nature of Russ' comment but to the fact that someone who would make such a comment in a public venue was a major political liability to Open Source.

I still think it was overblown given the personal nature of the blog, public or not.

In the companies where those folks worked, what Russ wrote would have gotten a person fired, and their response to us was "get rid of that guy".

Yes, it might have gotten him fired, which might, in turn, have gotten the company sued, as we are learning from some fired-for-blogging cases like the "Queen of Sky" case among others. Corporate executives need to grow thicker skins.

-Paul Iadonisi
 Senior System Administrator
 Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
 Ever see a penguin fly?  --  Try Linux.
 GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets

Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements

Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:38 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link]

Slight correction. The Queen of Sky issue isn't being litigated, as best as I could find out, though she did file a complaint with the EEOC and was appealing to the airline to try and get her job back.

-Paul Iadonisi
 Senior System Administrator
 Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
 Ever see a penguin fly?  --  Try Linux.
 GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets