It derives from freedom #1
Posted Sep 26, 2006 2:23 UTC (Tue) by coriordan
In reply to: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
Parent article: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3
The need for the DRM-related words in the licence is derived from freedom #1: "The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs".
If I get the software as part of a hardware+software system, but after modifying the software the hardware transforms into a brick, then I have not been given freedom #1 in a meaningful sense. It's like pulling the trigger and out pops a flag saying "BANG".
In the case of the Tivo, I might want to remove the spyware and add a "copy to my computer" button. Making these modifications and then running my new version of the software on anything but my Tivo will not fulfil my needs.
In the 1990s, to ensure that freedom #1 survived the distribution chain, the GPL had to require people to published the source of any published binaries. In 2006, the GPL also has to require people to give the recipient any codes or passwords that the distributor has made necessary to run modified versions of the software.
to post comments)