I think I understand it a little
I think I understand it a little
Posted Sep 27, 2006 11:25 UTC (Wed) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562)In reply to: Why Torvalds is sitting out the GPLv3 process (Linux.com) by gallir
Parent article: Why Torvalds is sitting out the GPLv3 process (Linux.com)
Actually GPLv3 wouldn't matter to Linus and comrades, but the problem is that Linux kernel depends on a lot of GPL programs including the glibc. Without the glibc, the kernel is actually quite useless. So the problem is that if GPLv3 comes into effect, Linux kernel even though is GPLv2 it will be for all practical purposes GPLv3. Because even though there is no compatibility problem due to the "v2 or later" clause, but the users can ask for the ability to modify the glibc. Which basically makes the system impossible to contain DRM. The only solution is to rewrite glibc with a different license. I am sure there are other clones but the kernel people don't use them, and it will be difficult to validate them.
This means that Linux cannot be used on any device that requires that the system remain faithful to the manufacturer as opposed to the buyer. Some example of these systems are
1) media players and recorders, because of copywrite problems.
2) Mobile sets, because of bundling problems. They sell them at a loss and hope to recoupe it up by enabling features and locking you into their network.
This means that proliferation of Linux into these spaces is going to stop. Doesn't matter how strong Linux's potential is currently. And these markets are huge.
Inspite of these problems we do need GPLv3 if we want open devices in the future. Without the GPLv3 there will be no DRM free future. But if we have it now when Linux in embedded spaces is not very strong we risk delaying the uptake of GPLv3.
It would have been nice if GPLv3 was delayed by about 5 years, when those manufacturers would have been so used to Linux that removing linux would not be an option.
I believe that Linus et al are trying to delay the GPLv3 drafting procedure for as long as they can to delay the GPLv3 hoping to get more manufacturers on board. I am quite sure that if this was introduced 3-4 years from now they would have agreed to it. They would have had first hand experience of the problems by then also ;-).