LWN.net Logo

Busy busy busybox

Busy busy busybox

Posted Oct 2, 2006 17:07 UTC (Mon) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)
In reply to: Busy busy busybox by nix
Parent article: Busy busy busybox

What you're missing is how much work that FSF has been doing to please corporate lawyers, as well as how much work they are doing to make GPLv3 work under legal systems other than the Anglo-American one.

Linus has one real objection: DRM. Everything else about GPLv3 is going to wind up as an improvement, particularly the patent language and the compatibility language. Many of the objections I've seen to GPLv3 other than to the DRM section are based on the fact that GPLv3 states clearly things that were already implied in GPLv2 (e.g. when you distribute a GPL program you are giving the recipients a license to use, modify, and distribute that program even if you have a patent that it infringes).

Perhaps the DRM dispute will be unbridgeable, but I think everything else can be solved.


(Log in to post comments)

Busy busy busybox

Posted Oct 2, 2006 18:42 UTC (Mon) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

No he doesn't just hate the DRM.

He hates the Patent language also.

He hates the increased license compatability. In fact if you make a diff between GPLv2 an GPLv3, then you'll see just about everything he hates about the GPLv3.

As you can see with the Bitkeeper debacle he has no problem putting restrictions on other kernel developers and has nothing against propriatory software, even if it's required to do kernel developer. "Best tools for the jobs" and that sort of tiing.

As far as he is concerned there is on point behind GPLv3 besides FSF/RMS 'attempting to hijack other people's code for their political ends' type things.

Busy busy busybox

Posted Oct 2, 2006 22:34 UTC (Mon) by cventers (subscriber, #31465) [Link]

> As far as he is concerned there is on point behind GPLv3 besides
> FSF/RMS 'attempting to hijack other people's code for their political
> ends' type things.

I wish to simply quote and emphasize this point because of how ridiculous
it is in light of the fact that the action FSF and RMS are taking that
Linus feels is a hijacking attempt is to update the Copyleft Free
Software license that _RMS invented_ and _Linus used_. He thinks that
since Linux is a big and important project using the GPL that RMS
shouldn't change his own license. But wouldn't that be an example of
Linux 'hijacking' the GPL?

Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds