Seems GPL2 or GPL3 already requires this

Posted Nov 29, 2024 10:41 UTC (Fri) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172)
In reply to: Seems GPL2 or GPL3 already requires this by pabs
Parent article: Arch Linux finally starts licensing PKGBUILDs

Interesting, thank you, in his blog-post Kuhn writes.

Specifically, I asked him on 2012-05-05:
[so], these words in GPLv3: “The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made.” mean that the proprietary software that is not a combined work with the GPLv3'd work must also function?
Stallman replied on 2012-05-06 with:
Absolutely. And I wrote it specifically to do that!

In the slides he says:

Ironically, even if Linux were GPLv3, Tivo’s method of crypto-lock-down would likely comply with GPLv3.

bkuhn checked this with RMS: even he agrees this mechanism complies with GPLv3.

I can't find anywhere he has written his reasoning, would be interested to read a longer explanation of exactly what would and would not be a violation.