Possible routes to kernel on GPLv3 [LWN.net]

Possible routes to kernel on GPLv3

Posted Jan 27, 2007 15:34 UTC (Sat) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270)
In reply to: Possible routes to kernel on GPLv3 by coriordan
Parent article: GPL 3: An Open-Source Earthquake? (CRN)

"So where to draw the line? GPLv3 draws the line at network installs. Whatever parts of the software can be upgraded by the manufacturer over the network have to also be modifiable by the owner."

Can you clarify how you think GPLv3 draws the line at that point? I don't see anything in there that talks about a specific means of installing or even about who can do the installing (despite all the FSF comments about "manufacturers having rights they don't pass along"). It says that if there are checks based on keys, you need to provide the keys.

In reality, manufacturers almost never have the ability to push upgrades into delivered devices, though third parties (cable companies, mobile carriers, etc.) may, usually in conjunction with service contracts. Installs are typically done in stores or at the user's request.

The situation is, in fact (at least for cell phones), just as though the vendor said "we sold you version x of our product, but if you bring it back to the store, we'll swap it for the current version." You could get exactly the same model with ROM, but then the process would take a lot longer, since the owner's data would have to be transferred to the new device.

"The other ways to tackle the current DRM frenzy are to either (a) use our market pressure, but that's just choosing to fail since we have a track record of never using our market pressure effectively, or (b) shake off the power that the content industry has over us by moving to free content - this means discarding all culture made in your county and my country in the last century, and It won't happen."

On the contrary, there is some reason to believe that for music, at least, there is a real trend toward selling DRM-free MP3s (there was an article in the New York Times saying that in the last week <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/technology/23music.html...>).

(Log in to post comments)

Possible routes to kernel on GPLv3

Posted Jan 30, 2007 8:09 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

"""Can you clarify how you think GPLv3 draws the line at that point? I don't see anything in there that talks about a specific means of installing or even about who can do the installing (despite all the FSF comments about "manufacturers having rights they don't pass along"). It says that if there are checks based on keys, you need to provide the keys."""

Well that's a odd way to state it, but it's fairly effective.

It boils down to it: 'if the manufacturer can change out the software and replace it with a newer version then you should be able to do that also'

That is typically done through network access in embedded devices, but serial port access is common also.

This is different from, say, read-only firmware which the manufacturer doesn't have to let you change it, since they can't change it without taking the device appart and replacing the physical chip.

For example, with OpenMoko and their phones, the regulatory bits are in the firmware logic and only a abstracted form of the GSM tuner (or whatever) is presented to user space in the form of a serial interface which you interact with in a similar fasion to regular old modems.

That way the phone can be completely open source in the kernel (except for a GPS thing, which is another issue entirely) and still be able to respect the legal restrictions requirements.

Also it's prefectly GPLv3 compatable to have it so that you violate warrentees if you try to modify the software and such things. There is nothing in the GPLv3 that says the original manufacture has to remain liable if you change something and break it. Things like that.