https://www.itwire.com/open-source/linux-kernel-patch-maker-says-court-case-was-only-way-out.html
The head of security firm Open Source Security, Brad Spengler, says he had little option but to file a lawsuit against open source advocate Bruce Perens, who alleged back in 2017 that security patches issued for the Linux kernel by OSS violated the licence under which the kernel is distributed.
The case ended last week with Perens coming out on the right side of things; after some back and forth, a court doubled down on its earlier decision that OSS must pay Perens' legal costs as awarded in June 2018.
The remainder of the article is an interview with Brad Spengler about the case and the issue.
iTWire contacted Spengler soon after the case ended, as he had promised to speak at length about the issue once all legal issues were done and dusted. Queries submitted by iTWire along with Spengler's answers in full are given below:
Previously:
Court Orders Payment of $259,900.50 to Bruce Perens' Attorneys
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @11:33AM
IAAL[1]
>Right. Which GRSecurity isn't doing. They never placed a restriction in the legal sense;
Yes they did. What the linux copyright owners forbid is adding additional restrictive terms regarding the protected Work, between the licensee and whomever the licensee is distributing the protected Work to (or any derivative thereof.) Read section 6 of the GPLv2, and section 4.
GRSecurity has placed such a term. In writing[2].
[1] https://s1.desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/g/image/1581/75/1581752208084.jpg [desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz]
[2] https://new.perens.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2017/06/grsecstablepatchaccessagreement_additionalterms.pdf [perens.com]