Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758499AbXFNXTE (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:19:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756108AbXFNXSh (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:18:37 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.177]:15354 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755961AbXFNXSf (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:18:35 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=B0xkgmM8kGXRtU/blOW7XgjATcQUCN2UKrLCecm1JHzJajTeW1sdnURCSKcYDJ63QfiTukdkGsD3RvRWVBcu6iWcllGdV6o8gNMcZfaQGyzelRrjssSx4BUYywvKV2qLwVZaSEhrCbdPj1iYrlADllQUPgKKDYoqmEwNEJiXtjs= Message-ID: <9a8748490706141618t58082edctd4c166b82eddee97@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:18:34 +0200 From: "Jesper Juhl" To: "Alexandre Oliva" Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Cc: "Daniel Hazelton" , "Chris Friesen" , "Ingo Molnar" , "Alan Cox" , "Linus Torvalds" , "Greg KH" , "debian developer" , david@lang.hm, "Tarkan Erimer" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andrew Morton" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <46718044.1040108@nortel.com> <200706141848.55378.dhazelton@enter.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2557 Lines: 63 On 15/06/07, Alexandre Oliva wrote: [snip] > > So what is it that makes hardware so different that it can be used as > a trick to deny users freedoms, if other tricks can't? > [snip] Why can't you understand that the GPL v2 is a *software* license, it doesn't cover hardware at all. If I take some GPLv2 software, modify it and then distribute it on a CD-ROM and provide the source code as well, then I have complied with the terms of the license. If I take the same software, make the same modifications and distribute the software in a ROM inside some piece of hardware, but still allow people access to a copy of the source code used to build whatever I put inside that ROM, then I've also complied with the license. In neither case can you modify the copy on the hardware (be it ROM chip or CD-ROM), but that's not required by the license. As long as you have access to the source code it's OK. The license says nothing about you having to be able to update it on the hardware. The license only says you need access to the source code. No one is taking away your freedom to change the source or redistribute it or whatever. The only thing locked hardware prevents you from doing is installing modified software on that specific piece of hardware, but that is completely outside the scope of the *software* license. [snip] > > But then again I ask you: why do you think TiVO is making these > hardware locks? What do they want to cause or stop? > I can't know for a fact what TiVO wants, but I can guess. 1) Maybe they want to prevent you installing modified software on their hardware, then contacting them when you break it, costing them money in customer support etc. 2) Perhaps they don't want to risk being liable if you modify the software on their box in a way that allows you to use it as a means to break the law. 3) Maybe they don't want you to modify the software running on their hardware in such a way as to use the software to obtain intimate details about their hardware that could be used by a competitor to create a product superiour to theirs. All quite valid reasons in my opinion. -- Jesper Juhl Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/