Pipe 2XT0Q Yes you have standing to sue GRSecurity.

Yes you have standing to sue GRSecurity.

Anonymous Coward
in legal on (#2XT0Q)
It has come to my attention that some entities are claiming that you, dear Linux Hackers, (1)need to go through some foundation or get some permission from upon high in-order to sue the progenitors of GRSecurity for their violation of section 6 of the terms underwhich the linux kernel is distributed (version 2 of the GPL). And, furthermore, that (2)this foundation has no intention of bringing such a suit.

(1) is false.
(2) may very well be true.

You do have standing to sue GRSecurity for their blatant continuing copyright violation if GRSecurity has made a derivative work of your code contribution to the Linux Kernel as-long as (a)you have not assigned your copyrights, and (b)you are not a work-for-hire.

How do you know if you are a work for hire or if you have signed away your copyrights?
If you are working for a company and as your job duties you are programming the linux kernel, there is a good chance that you are a work for hire and thus the company owns said copyrights.

How do you know if you signed away your copyrights? Well if you singed a document transferring ownership of your copyrights for the code you produced at some point.

If you are not working for a company while hacking linux and you haven't assigned your copyrights away then YOU OWN YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS.

This means most of you hobby hackers, if GRSecurity has modified your code, YES YOU HAVE STANDING TO SUE.

Yes your "betters" are lying to you.
You have individual separate standing to sue.

Yes you SHOULD consult a lawyer of your own.
Yes you SHOULD consider a joint filing with other individual rights-holders willing to bring suit against GRSecurity for their blatant violation of your terms, and yes you should consider starting CLASS ACTION since the number of Linux Kernel Contributors seemingly numbers in the multitudes upon multitudes upon multitudes.

And yes, I am an attorney.
But no, I'm not looking for clients. Just correcting some false information that has been spreading.

And yes, GRSecurity will try to claim that the linux-kernel is a work of Joint ownership (so as to shield themselves via procedural law) and yes they will try to claim fair use (probably de minimus), and yes your Lawyer will have to respond to these claims. The Joint ownership claim will go down quickly but it will have to be responded to. De minimus Fair Use depends on how much code is modified and how signifigant the modifications are. Don't let anyone but your own legal council dissuade you from bringing suit: Remember the statute of limitations is only a few years, so the clock is ticking on the CURRENT violation.

Also make sure you register your copyright of the version of the linux-kernel that GRSecurity is using in its violation prior to bringing suit. The registration must be for the specific version. Yes you can register after the violation has occurred, however if you have registered before the violation then you can also pursue recovery of legal fees, pursue statutory damages, etc.

( NOTE: If you would like to read on how your copyright is being violated by GRSecurity, Bruce Perens posted a good write-up on his web-page )
( perens.com/blog/2017/06/28/warning-grsecurity-potential-contributory-infringement-risk-for-customers/ )
( There was also a discussion on the linux section of slashdot, and on the debian user mailing list, and on the dng devuan mailing list and on the openwall mailing list and the fedora legal mailing list )
score +1
  • Closed (junk)
Reply 0 comments