| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The Nook Tablet and the GPLThe Nook Tablet and the GPLPosted Jan 12, 2012 5:46 UTC (Thu) by rusty (✭ supporter ✭, #26)Parent article: The Nook Tablet and the GPL
I just want to note that *this* kernel developer thinks the intent of the GPLv2 language was clear, and it was never you-can-look-but-only-I-can-touch.
As to Linus' statement on overreach, I also disagree. People have attempted to override the GPL's "no further restrictions" clause via support agreements, employment agreements, NDAs, patent licensing, and witchcraft (ok, maybe not). A technological attempt to violate the license should fare no better.
(Log in to post comments)
The Nook Tablet and the GPL Posted Jan 12, 2012 5:54 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
Rusty, I know that some kernel developers feel as you do, but several others (notibly including Linus) have gone on record pretty vocally with the opinion that there is nothing against the license with this.
that would make suing over this a fairly dicy proposition. and in any case, I think you would be far more justified in going after vendors that not only lock down the bootloaders, but also don't provide the source (and there are many handset and tablet vendors doing this right now)
In any case, as with the original tivo (which I've now had, and hacked for over a decade now), the bootloader is going to be defeated at some point anyway.
The Nook Tablet and the GPL Posted Jan 12, 2012 16:07 UTC (Thu) by ortalo (subscriber, #4654) [Link]
From a different point of view: how are we going to power open source (our) efforts for a truly secure computing environment (including secure boot, etc.) if we need to rely on things like bootloaders cracking just in order to use open source (our) software on new devices?
More and more, it seems we happen to rely on these vulnerabilities we are usually chasing down to simply continue programming with nice devices. That's not very wise.
In my humble opinion, we should take an active stance for these devices to come with a procedure for fully resetting them, especially with respect to cryptographic keys. (Think of TPM versus smart cards for example.)
The Nook Tablet and the GPL Posted Feb 29, 2012 19:17 UTC (Wed) by JanC_ (guest, #34940) [Link]
Alternatively, devices could be sold in in two versions: pre-configured (with a secured Android, WebOS, Windows, etc. from the manufacturer) and unconfigured (you would then be able to lock these devices down yourself, if you prefer to).
There could even be a consumer law saying that either an unlocked version should always be available for the same price, or there should be a way to get it unlocked at the shop where you bought it...
The Nook Tablet and the GPL Posted Feb 29, 2012 20:25 UTC (Wed) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
> There could even be a consumer law saying that either an unlocked version should always be available for the same price
I would predict that such a law would have no practical effect.
As an example, there was a law passed saying that you cannot charge a different price for a cell phone depending on if the customer signs up for service or not.
the result was that instead of charging a higher price, you get a 'rebate' if you sign up for service when you buy the phone.
no practical difference, but the letter of the law is being complied with.
|
|
||||||||||||