| |||||||||||||
Kernel developers' position on GPLv3Kernel developers' position on GPLv3Posted Sep 23, 2006 1:28 UTC (Sat) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270)In reply to: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3 by emk Parent article: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
Nobody is arguing against the GPL! The question is whether the changes in the proposed next version of the GPL improve the license or not.
(Log in to post comments)
Kernel developers' position on GPLv3 Posted Sep 25, 2006 9:46 UTC (Mon) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562) [Link] But this is a GPL argument. The only difference is whether you are allowed to use technical measures to defeat the provisions of GPL. Tivoisation is merely circumventing the GPL using DRM.
I am not sure if you know what the intent behind GPL is. I would like to remind you of the story of the Printer, and ask you to think about the Tivo again. It should be clear in a moment.
Kernel developers' position on GPLv3 Posted Sep 25, 2006 14:42 UTC (Mon) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270) [Link] The kernel developers [and some of us others] seem to disagree with your contention that Tivoization violates the GPLv2. I know SOME people claim that it does, and that SOME others claim that it violates the spirit but not the letter, but there are quite a few of us who say that there is nothing in GPLv2 that requires that you be able to install on the same device.
I do know the story of the printer firmware and RMS's belief that devices should be upgradeable, I just disagree with them.
I think that there is enough opposition to this broadening that it will fragment the community and reduce its influence (and its ability to compete with, for instance, Microsoft) if GPLv3 continues in the directions taken in the current draft.
|
|||||||||||||