>ESR: Eben Moglen suggested that he was going to write a paper refuting the notion that "The GPL is revocable": > >>I think the best procedure would be for me to publish my analysis and >>for you then to tell me what is wrong with it. >https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/26/718 > >Why has no such paper from him materialized?
ESR response was shocking, blunt, and to the point: >esr on 2019-05-30 at 08:08:23 said: > >>Why has no such paper from him materialized? > >Because Moglen is either wrong about or deliberately misrepresenting the law and the "revokists" have it right. Thank you, I had already figured this out from his (non)responses on lkml.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8317#comment-2238862 (Archive link: http://archive.fo/emkVd )
A commentator asked on Eric S. Raymond's website:
>ESR: Eben Moglen suggested that he was going to write a paper refuting the notion that "The GPL is revocable":
>
>>I think the best procedure would be for me to publish my analysis and
>>for you then to tell me what is wrong with it.
>https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/26/718
>
>Why has no such paper from him materialized?
ESR response was shocking, blunt, and to the point:
>esr on 2019-05-30 at 08:08:23 said:
>
>>Why has no such paper from him materialized?
>
>Because Moglen is either wrong about or deliberately misrepresenting the law and the "revokists" have it right. Thank you, I had already figured this out from his (non)responses on lkml.