Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757399AbXFPUFB (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 16:05:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754891AbXFPUEy (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 16:04:54 -0400 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.169]:2430 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754888AbXFPUEx (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 16:04:53 -0400 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: RE: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 13:04:34 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sat, 16 Jun 2007 13:05:02 -0700 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sat, 16 Jun 2007 13:05:03 -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3864 Lines: 78 > On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton wrote: > > I don't see how TiVO has done this. They have placed no restrictions on > > *modification* at all. What they have done is placed a restriction on > > *REPLACEMENT* of the program. > Technicality. In order for the software to remain free (which is what > the GPL is all about), the user must not be stopped from adapting the > software to suit his needs and running it for any purpose. TiVo > places restrictions on it. It's really this simple. No, this is completely and utterly wrong. By this logic, Linux isn't free if I can't run it on *YOUR* laptop. TiVo places restrictions on *hardware*. The hardware is not free. > And then, TiVo doesn't really prohibit replacement. You can replace > it as much as you like; just not as conveniently as TiVo can replace > it. And then, if you do, it won't run, because it's not signed with a > key that they omit from the source code. And they do this in order to > prevent the user from changing the behavior of the Free Software that > they use, while they keep this ability to themselves. > If these are not restrictions on the freedoms that the GPL is designed > to protect to ensure that Free Software remains Free for all its > users, I don't know what is. So why is it not a restriction on this freedom that I can't modify the copy of Linux running on *your* desktop? If it helps you to understand the situation better, think of TiVo as not really selling you the hardware. To see why this isn't a GPL issue, imagine if TiVo explicitly didn't sell the hardware. Imagine if they only rented it or sold it but retained the right to control what software ran on it. Essentially, your TiVo would be like my laptop -- you don't get to decide what software runs on it. But if you get GPL'd software, you get source code. Regardless of how the GPL came to be in the first place, the vast majority of people who chose to use the GPL (including Linus himself) choose it so that the code can't be modified and distributed and those modifications kept secret. The idea is that any change widely distributed in binary form is nearly assured to propogate back in source code form, and is assured to get to those who paid for the binary. Linus, and many other people, don't give a damn (from a GPL perspective) about what TiVo does with their hardware. They may agree with it, disagree with it, think it's legal, maybe even illegal, but they don't think it has *anything* to do with the intent or spirit of the GPLv2 as *they* understand it and for the reasons *they* chose it. They just want to get source code, and they really don't care what other people do with it -- they care about what *they* can do with it. They just want the source code, and TiVo gives it to them. GPL was about source code not being secret, to them and to many others. > No, they're using the hardware (along with other pieces of software) > to deny users (but not themselves) the freedoms that the license of > software *meant* to defend, for that software, even if some believe it > doesn't actually defend them. At least to Linus, the GPL was never meant to defend the freedom to run Linux on any hardware you want. It was just meant to ensure that you couldn't keep the source code secret. I personally feel precisely the same way and I think many other people do too. I think that what TiVo is doing is wrong for completely different reasons that have nothing to do with the fact that it happens to run Linux or that Linux happens to be free software. But I think I've already made that clear in other posts. DS - 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/