Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

Posted Sep 25, 2006 10:23 UTC (Mon) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562)
In reply to: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3 by sepreece
Parent article: Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

This is the same argument that BSD guys would give. They are the ones saying that their license is business friendly. But you know what, GPL is the more business friendly because of the prisoners dilemma. It forces all the companies to cooperate, while the BSD favours the one not playing fair. Similar is the difference between GPLv2 and GPLv3 regarding the DRM. the GPLv3 will in the long run turn out to be the one that survives better because it will again force companies to play fair rather that hiding behind DRM.

You are afraid that the big businesses will run away if they see the DRM is not allowed in Linux and Linux will suffer. But the question is again of the Prisoners Dilemma. Do you see any reason (apart from GPLv3) why they will not use DRM? And don't give me the bull**it about benefits of sharing, the prisoners dilemma guarantees that they will not share. If there will not be appreciable number of important programs that are not GPLv3 we should see very easily in the future a plethora of Tivoised devices.

You say that GPLv3 cannot block the progress of devices containing DRM. But at least it will provide an economic reason for not using DRM. Without that reason there is nothing that can block the progress of DRM.

If the kernel developers cannot be bothered to think beyond total domination of Linux they should at least let the other people think of the future.