Subject: Re: GPL V3 and Linux
From: Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@firmix.at>
To: Ian Kester-Haney <ikesterhaney@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <441e43c90601241721o8b4a9e5rd3a237f70aa46dbb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKIEOMJJAB.davids@webmaster.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.61.0601240839380.17175@chaos.analogic.com>
	 <43D65211.20006@wolfmountaingroup.com>
	 <441e43c90601241721o8b4a9e5rd3a237f70aa46dbb@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Firmix Software GmbH
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:42:24 +0100
Message-Id: <1138182144.4800.12.camel@tara.firmix.at>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2414
Lines: 57

On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 19:21 -0600, Ian Kester-Haney wrote:
[...]
> friendly.  Should the individuals producing, directing and starring in
> movies and music be penalized for the abuses of the recording

Of course not. But I can't see any mentioning of these in the propaganda
of the big music industry.

> industry.  Piracy does exist and supporting the real creative works of
> others is important.

ACK.
But DRM will not stop (or even hinder seriously) the big commercial
copying organizations only the private copies (even if they are legal by
allmeans).
So this argument is plain simply moot.

> I seruiosly doubt that anyone commited to the Open Source community
> would condone piracy, just as I am sure that Protection schemes always
> break down in the end.  It is sometimes irresponsible to circumvent
> methods designed to protect peoples copyright.  The viral liscensing
> in the GPL v 2 allows for the best integration with 3rd party
> applications.
> The GPLv3 would not allow any copyrighted materials under DRM to be
> viewed, one could even argue that protected PDF files might constitute
> DRM and not be allowed under the new GPL.  I think that subverting the

With the exception that I *can* circumvent the protection on PDFs *if*
I'm legally allowed to copy the copyrighted work (with or without the
owner's permission - this is one reason for a legal copy. But there are
others which cannot be inhibited by the copyright holder - which is
usually not the artist).

> files is detrimental to the Open Source Community.  It should be noted
> that DRM is not inherently bad, implementations are currently pretty

No, but the motivation behind and the reasons for it existence is bad.

> crappy, but surely an open source DRM could be presented, and a step
> to make that happen would be to keep the Kernel under GPLv2.

Let's see if DRM actually get accepted or shares the success of micro
channel and other big business must-have "inventions".

[ Fullquote killed ]

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/