What's their basis for sending the emails then? If not one of legal standing in copyright/contract law?

Edit: My point is this is just another one of many annoying people you have to deal with who will email you alleging all sorts of legal violations, who don't themselves understand anything about the claims they are making.

▲

austhrow743 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Basis? You mean reason?

They want the Linux kernel source code.

▲

cj 3 hours ago | parent [-]

No, he means basis, not reason. There's a difference and I'm genuinely curious in your answer.

▲

austhrow743 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure, I understand that there's a difference. That's why I sought clarification.

My understanding of the concept of "basis" does not fit the context of sending an email, and "reason" is the closest I can find that fits.

Basis being concerned with rules or authority. The assumption being when asking "what is the basis for X?" that there was a bar that needed to be met beyond the doers motivations. That there needed to be more than they wanted to. Which of course, does not apply to sending an email. I could email you right now asking you what your favourite type of fish is or seeing if you want to play a game of chess, no basis needed. I'd just need a reason to.

▲

cj 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That’s a very intricate and convoluted way of saying they have no basis for making a demand.

But sounds like we agree, they have no real basis for making a demand.

▲

austhrow743 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Poorly explained maybe but it covers not just that there is no basis but that no basis is needed and draws attention to the odd request for a basis where none is needed.

Just "there is no basis" as a response would be like saying "yes" or "no" to "have you stopped beating your wife?"

▲

cj 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Aren’t we talking about enforcing/exercising a legal right?

Whether you have a reason to make a claim is much different than whether you have a legal basis for your claim.

	▲	austhrow743 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		We're talking about Lost-Entrepreneur439 on Reddit emailing a company to ask for some of their code. You can just do that. No GPL, open source, enforcement, demands, etc language needed. Just "I'm trying to do X, can I see the code for Y?". I receive and send them at work pretty frequently. They've mentioned the GPL as a way to try to increase the chances of getting sent the code. A support person for a medical device company might not know anything about software licences or linux or GPL. If the company has some sort of "send GPL code to askers" policy and Lost-Entrepreneur439 just asks for the linux kernel, the support person might not know that the GPL policy applies and just say no. If you include it in your message then it increases the chances of them typing "GPL" in to whatever internal knowledge bank they have and seeing "for GPL requests, forward the enquiry to jeff@ourcompany.com" or something like that. The GPL isn't between Lost-Entrepreneur439 and the company so I don't think "enforcement/exercising a legal right" is an accurate way to describe what we're talking about. That would be if the copyright holders to the linux kernel get involved. EDIT: Although that seems like largely just a semantics thing. Like if a judge orders a company to pay you some money and you say "give it to austhrow743" is it valid to say that I have a right to that money? Or is it that you have the right that I get that money? If someone wants to phrase "linux kernel copyright holders have a right to demand users of their code share it with anyone who asks" as "anyone who asks has a right to that code" then I don't really have a problem with that. I just see a big difference between making a request and making a claim. I don't need to think I'm legally entitled to something to ask for it. I don't even need to think that getting it is likely. Whereas Abigail appears to be treating sending and receiving requests by emails as equivalent to a court summons.