| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions (KernelTrap.org)Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions (KernelTrap.org)Posted Oct 26, 2006 0:19 UTC (Thu) by bojan (subscriber, #14302)In reply to: Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions (KernelTrap.org) by sepreece Parent article: Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions (KernelTrap.org)
Thanks for the clarification on wireless network disruptions. I really don't know anything about that, so I was just guessing (obviously incorrectly) the "obscurity" was the reason for wanting locked devices on the network.
> Is it surprising that manufacturers don't wish to risk their certification and liability suits by letting third parties modify their devices?
Exactly. They find a device that is both flexible (i.e. programmable via the network) and at the same time locked quite useful. Releasing keys for the software on such a device would make it unlocked again, defeating the purpose of locking it in the first place.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||