Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

Posted Sep 23, 2006 0:58 UTC (Sat) by Felix_the_Mac (guest, #32242)
In reply to: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3 by mattmelton
Parent article: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

"There is little (if any) comprimise in the wording. eg: if end-user restrictions are against the free software philosophy - why have a bloody licence in the first place?"

Because the GPL v2 is the license which has generated the ecosystem that we have today. In the terms of this ecosystem (i.e. of developers) the fact that a Tivo user cannot reprogram his device is not a major concern. The developers still have any _useful_ changes that Tivo have made to the GPL software.

to post comments

Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

Posted Sep 23, 2006 3:46 UTC (Sat) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (1 responses)

besides which, tivo doesn't make it impossible to hack their devices (I have three hacked tivo's in my house right now), they do make it hard, but as the modchips for the Xbox and other game systems have shown even extreme modifications can be packaged to be relativly easy to install.

the real battle is against DMCA type laws that make it illegal to modify systems. such laws can cause far more harm then _any_ technological measures the manufacturer could impose.

and once you break through the outer shell of protection it's FAR easier to modify a device that you have the source for then one where you have to reverse engineer every step along the way.

Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

Posted Sep 25, 2006 10:41 UTC (Mon) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562) [Link]

Can you tell us what other protections they could add that would make it more difficult, without affecting their margins. I am sure they have tried as much as possible.