My projects will be migrated to GPLv3

Posted Sep 22, 2006 22:19 UTC (Fri) by emk (subscriber, #1128)
In reply to: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3 by mckyj57
Parent article: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

My projects will be migrated to GPLv3 as quickly as possible, because as a developer, I'm not willing to let third parties restrict my users' freedom.

Remember, 20 years from now, we'll most likely own many smaller devices running Linux, each of which will have access to some of our private data. It's unacceptable that users be prevented from hacking these devices. Who wants to be surrounded by a hundred tattle-tales and spies?

to post comments

My projects will be migrated to GPLv3

Posted Sep 22, 2006 23:30 UTC (Fri) by mattmelton (guest, #34842) [Link]

I also do not want software I create under the GPL to be altered, extended, encrypted and then sold... no one else the wiser.

While I dont want to say it, isnt not-embracing the anti-drm measures freedom-piracy?

Freedom-pirary :( It has a frightening ring to it.

If more noteworthy lkml hackers would talk openly about this, instead of being timid in the face of the hardworking developers, I'm sure people would come around.

* Actively supporting and encouraging the GPLv3 drafts doesnt mean you have less appreciation for the work done by the v2-supporting club - we owe so much, this is just politics *

My projects will be migrated to GPLv3

Posted Sep 22, 2006 23:39 UTC (Fri) by ehlarson (guest, #40687) [Link] (3 responses)

Third parties will restrict all users freedom; that is a given. They will select software that enables their business objectives.

What they won't be able to do is restrict it using GPLv3 licensed software. This will mean that the thrid parties will be using and funding software that uses a different license. That might be proprietary software or it might be FOSS.

What is going to be the impact of adopting GPLv3? You wont have anyone using your software.

Not willing to accept popularity at the cost of users' privacy

Posted Sep 23, 2006 11:51 UTC (Sat) by emk (subscriber, #1128) [Link] (1 responses)

"What is going to be the impact of adopting GPLv3? You wont have anyone using your software."

Hey, I'm giving the software away for free, right? If I'm not willing to compromise my user's freedom and privacy to make my software popular, that's my ethical choice. If TIVO wants to make DRMed spyware that logs every show a user watches, then they can do it without my help.

I'm very sensitive to privacy issues, and I don't believe that consumer electronics should tattle back to the mothership 24 hours a day. At least with the anti-DRM provisions in GPLv3, you'll always be able to buy cheapo generic hardware (from some bottom-feeder without a software budget), and hack out the spyware and tattletales.

The Linux kernel team's opinion on GPLv3 is moot, anyway--they removed the upgrade clause from the GPLv2 boilerplate, so they'll never be able to use the GPLv3, anyway. But as a developer, I'm glad that GPLv3 tries to preserve the four freedoms for my users.

Not willing to accept popularity at the cost of users' privacy

Posted Sep 24, 2006 3:26 UTC (Sun) by jstAusr (guest, #27224) [Link]

Thank you!

My projects will be migrated to GPLv3

Posted Sep 23, 2006 19:38 UTC (Sat) by Tester (guest, #40675) [Link]

Third parties will restrict all users freedom; that is a given. They will select software that enables their business objectives.

What is going to be the impact of adopting GPLv3? You wont have anyone using your software.

They may choose any software they want.. If all I care was that the software be used, I'd place it in the public domain or use the BSD license. But I dont want to help them destroy my freedom and the freedom of others.