content: The SJWs Supporting The New CoC for the Linux Kernel May Have Kicked a Massive Hornet Nest After Joey Pabalinas posted a message titled "A Plea to Unfuck our Codes of Conduct" via the Linux Kernel Mailing List, unconditionedwitness@redchan replied with the following: Regarding those who are ejected from the Linux Kernel Community after  this CoC: Contributors can, at any time, rescind the license grant regarding their  property via written notice to those whom they are rescinding the grant  from (regarding their property (code)) . The GPL version 2 lacks a no-rescission clause (the GPL version 3 has  such a clause: to attempt furnish defendants with an estoppel defense,  the Linux Kernel is licensed under version 2, however, as are the past  contributions). When the defendants ignore the rescission and continue using the  plaintiff's code, the plaintiff can sue under the copyright statute. Banned contributors should do this (note: plaintiff is to register  their copyright prior to filing suit, the copyright does not have to be  registered at the time of the violation however) Additionally when said banned contributors joined the Linux team, they  were under the impression that it was a meritocracy: in-fact this belief  was stated or ratified by those within the governing body regarding  Linux when the contributors began their work (whatever that body was at  that time, it could have been simply Linus, or Linus and a few  associates). The remuneration for the work was implied to be, or perhaps stated, to  be fame as-well as a potential increase in the contributors stature, in  addition to membership in the Linux Kernel club or association, or  whatever it is that the Linux Kernel Community actually is (which a  court may determine... it is something, suffice to say). Thusly for work, consideration was promised by (Linus? Others? There are  years of mailing list archives with which to determine). And now that consideration has been clawed-back and the contributors  image has been tarnished. Thus the worker did work, however the other side of the implied, or  perhaps written (email memorandums), understanding has been violated  (once the contributor has been banned under the new non-meritocratic  "CoC"). Damages could be recovered under: breach of contract, quazi-contract,  libel, false-light. (services rendered for the contractual claims,  future lost income for the libel claims) In addition to copyright claims. (statutory damages, profits) For greatest effect, all rescission should be done at once in a bloc.  (With other banned contributors). Contributors: You were promised something, you laboured for that  promise, and now the promise has become a lie. You have remedies  available to you now, as-well as in the close future . Additionally, regarding those who promoted the Code of Conduct to be  used against the linux kernel contributors, knowing full well the effect  it would have and desiring those effects; recovery for the ejected  contributors via a tortious interference claim may be possible. TL;DR - The Linux devs that leave or get kicked out due the new CoC could legally break the kernel if the new rules remain in place. EDIT - Thanks for the upvotes, goats. This whole situation is messed up, but I'm staying put because (unlike Windows) Linux just fucking works when I need to create shit for work or want to play some vidya. Remember: These hypersensitive kike pawns want the same CoC implemented everywhere. Not just FOSS projects. We will win as long as we keep pushing back.