User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

How not to handle a licensing violation

How not to handle a licensing violation

Posted Apr 12, 2007 9:31 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
In reply to: How not to handle a licensing violation by rickmoen
Parent article: How not to handle a licensing violation

"There's a certain lovely irony in a habitual Linux user (that would be me) making efforts to understand what happened, and, for his pains, being accused of making "excuses". It isn't much compared to the larger ironies noted by others, but I thank you for your contribution, anyway."

You misunderstood what I ment.

I didn't think _you_ were making excuses for him.

What you stated was realy very close to what Theo stated for Marcus's excuses. So I thought you were talking about _their_ excuses.

Plus I don't think that it's impossible or stupid to think that could happen. I think it's unlikely.

I am still willing to beleive it one way or the other. The guy deserves the benifit of the doubt.

It's just fishy excuses, that's all. I think that they could come up with something better.


(Log in to post comments)

How not to handle a licensing violation

Posted Apr 12, 2007 9:33 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

PS. But if that is what happenned then that's possible.

I agree that realy it doesn't matter. The problem is resolved one way or the other.

I just wish the OpenBSD developers would choose to work _with_ the bcm43xx folks to help get broadcom driver support for OpenBSD rather then spend their time fighting them.

The whole thing is pretty stupid.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds