Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756871AbXFPSnr (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:43:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753458AbXFPSnk (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:43:40 -0400 Received: from dhazelton.dsl.enter.net ([216.193.185.50]:50357 "EHLO mail.keil-draco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753131AbXFPSnk (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:43:40 -0400 From: Daniel Hazelton To: Alexandre Oliva Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:43:26 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Tim Post , Ingo Molnar , Alan Cox , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton References: <200706132304.21984.dhazelton@enter.net> <200706160007.46024.dhazelton@enter.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706161443.26338.dhazelton@enter.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2083 Lines: 43 On Saturday 16 June 2007 04:21:04 Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton wrote: > > On Friday 15 June 2007 23:44:00 Alexandre Oliva wrote: > >> On Jun 16, 2007, Tim Post wrote: > >> > On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 23:29 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> >> Tivo has two choices: either it gives > >> >> users the content they want to watch, or it goes out of business. Is > >> >> that legitimate enough of a reason to restrict the hardware? > >> > > >> > Can I submit that they could just rent the use of their machines? > >> > >> I don't think this would escape the wording of section 6 in GPLv3dd4: > >> > >> [...] User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or > >> for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is > >> characterized), [...] > >> > >> and IMHO that's as it should be to defend the freedoms of the user. > > > > In the case of renting a machine you can try to legislate new laws all > > you want. It doesn't make a difference. There are certain rights you > > don't get when renting something that you do when you own it. > > You mean renting the computer with the software in it is not > distribution of the software? It is. But you don't have the same rights to a rented machine as you do to one you have purchased. In fact, in renting a machine you have to agree to a "renters contract" - and that can state *whatever* the person that is renting the machine to you feels like having it state. And yes, they can even have terms in it that violate the GPL. Not that a "renters contract" ("rental agreement" or whatever they call them in your jurisdiction) that has those terms can *legally* violate the GPL - but it doesn't stop them from existing. DRH -- Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful. - 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/