diff --git a/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html b/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html index 02c03f83fdd5c7a7916a3cc529700a1710b48e79..9f219197a1da03cce8fdcd663767e376de96ced9 100644 --- a/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html +++ b/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html @@ -148,6 +148,23 @@ +
I +see FSF's +statement of support, but why +isn't FSF enforcing in +this case?
+ +
While FSF are the authors and license steward of the GNU GPL, it's up to +the copyright holder to enforce GPL. VMware created an operating system by +combining parts of the kernel named Linux with their own proprietary code, +and then added BusyBox to provide the userspace operating system components. +As such, ESXi is not +a traditional GNU/Linux +system. FSF has many copyrights of its own, but these are almost +exclusively on various parts of the GNU system, not on the kernel, Linux. As +such, FSF probably does not have copyright interests available to directly +enforce the GPL regarding the primary issue in this case.
I care about copyleft and the GPL. How can I help?
Conservancy needs