Re: kernel.org status: establishing a PGP web of trust

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 20:50:08 EDT, Arnaud Lacombe said:

> Just thinking about it, but even if lawyers have been involved, this
> has been done, unless error of my part, behind closed doors, without
> any public records, so I'd tempted to ask "who paid those lawyers?",
> "what was the qualification of those lawyers?", "what was the interest
> of those lawyers?" and "what was the interest of those who paid the
> lawyers?".

At least in the US, the answer to "what was the interest of those lawyers?" is
almost always "to represent the interests of their clients in a legally ethical
manner".  Intentional disregard for the client's interests can and does get you
disbarred.  Any lawyer who stuck in a clause that was contrary to the client's
interest would also be doing so against their own interest - lawyers can get
sued for malpractice or (as noted) even disbarrment.  So I don't think you need
to worry about some lawyer with a pro-Microsoft agenda secretly sticking in a
hidden phrase that's actually against Linux's interest. (In particular, it's
*really* hard to hide detrimental language in something as short and heavily
read as the Developer's Certificate of Origin).

And if you *do* worry about that, you better also question whether the
people supplying tin foil are part of the conspiracy too.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature