Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759296AbXFMXDb (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:03:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756045AbXFMXDW (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:03:22 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:38539 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756576AbXFMXDV (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:03:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:02:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Alexandre Oliva cc: Lennart Sorensen , Greg KH , debian developer , "david@lang.hm" , Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <466BCBBC.90305@netone.net.tr> <20070610160531.GA12179@kroah.com> <20070612184110.GB7980@kroah.com> <20070613211432.GH10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3946 Lines: 85 On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > [...] Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have > the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for > this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get > it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of > it in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things. > > To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid > anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the > rights. These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities > for you if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify > it. > > [...] if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or > for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have > > > Can anyone show me how any of the provisions of GPLv3 fails to meet > this spirit? What kind of logic is that? It sounds like "Can you prove that God doesn't exist?" The fact is, Tivo didn't take those rights away from you, yet the FSF says that what Tivo did was "against the spirit". That's *bullshit*. So the whole "to protect these rights, we take away other rigths" argument hinges on the false premise that the new language in GPLv3 is somehow needed. It's not. You still had the right to distribute the software (and modify it), even if the *hardware* is limited to only one version. In other words, GPLv3 restricts rights that do not need to be restricted, and yes, I think that violates the spirit of the GPLv2 preamble! Think of it this way: what if the GPLv3 had an addition saying "You can not use this software to make a weapon". Do you see the problem? It restricts peoples rights, would you agree? Would you _also_ agree that it doesn't actually follow that "To protect your rights" logic AT ALL? And this is exactly where the GPLv3 *diverges* from the above logic. If I build hardware, and sell it with software installed, you can still copy and modify the software. You may not do so within the confines of the hardware I built, but the hardware was never under the license in the first place. In other words, GPLv3 *restricts* peoples freedoms more than it protects them. It does *not* cause any additional stated freedoms - quite the reverse. It tries to free up stuff that was never mentioned in the first place. And then the FSF has the gall to call themselves the "protector of freedoms", and claim that everybody else is evil. What a crock. In other words, if you want to argue for the changes in GPLv3, you need to CHANGE THE PREAMBLE TOO! You should change: When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs, that you can do so in place on your devices, even if those devices weren't licensed under the GPL; and that you know you can do these things. where I added the "that you can do so in place on your devices, even if those devices weren't licensed under the GPL". That wasn't there in the original. Yet it's what the GPLv3 tries to shove down our throats in the name of "freedom". I don't know if you've followed US politics very much over the last six years, but there's been a lot of "protecting our freedoms" going on. And it's been ugly. Maybe you could realize that sometimes "protecting your freedom" is *anything*but*! Linus - 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/