[austhrow743]

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]

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]

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 [e-mail]" 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.

[abigail95]

And now we get to my question of why. They want the Linux source code, the company is not giving it to them, why is the next step a blog post instead of a lawsuit? Again this is a medical device - it's important enough to spend the money on.

They make a blog post about GPL violations which allege the company is violating the law.

I'm absolutely begging for anyone in a similar situation to prove it. The reasons those emails were sent is because they think they have a legal entitlement to be sent the source code. *PROVE IT*. It's cheap!