Subject: Re: GPL and FTP
From: Russell Nelson <>
Date: 31 Dec 1997 13:50:42 -0000

Bernard Lang writes:
 > >  There are other packet driver
 > > suppliers who did not abide by the GPL: Xircom, Persoft, and RAM
 > > Mobile Data (although RAM ended up paying their pound of flesh) ..
 > could you be more explicit.
 >   Is that one example of the GPL being legally enforced ?

No.  I knew that that packet driver existed, but not that it was a GPL
violation.  When RAM approached me with some business (fix this packet
driver of ours), I volunteered to license the packet driver to them
for proprietary distribution (doing anything else would be
ungrateful.)  They had to be LARTed about the T&C of the GPL at that
point, and they became rather alarmed.  Seems that the contractor who
developed it for them either didn't understand the GPL, or
deliberately violated it, but not as bad as Persoft, which *removed*
Crynwr copyright messages and mention of the GPL.  Xircom was
basically an innocent infringer.  They wanted a proprietary packet
driver in the first place.  At that time, I didn't own the packet
driver copyright, and wasn't doing dual-licensing, so they had to
discard the one Brad Clements wrote for them.  They went to Persoft,
who, lo and behold, came up with a "proprietary" (e.g. stolen) packet
driver.  Eventually their perfidy came to light (with the help of one
Greg Kokerinos), I sent them a demand letter (with some help from the
FSF's lawyer, Jerry Cohen), and they desisted distributing "their"
packet drivers, but not without some strong resistance on the part of
their president (Tom Wolfe, the jerk) about how I had put them in the
public domain by distributing source code.

But no, there was never any legal action.

-russ <>  | Freedom is the
Crynwr Software supports freed software | PGPok |   primary cause of peace.
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Obedient, Christian, statist:
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   |    you only get to pick two.