Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760943AbXFQTsa (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 15:48:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759963AbXFQTsV (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 15:48:21 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:34054 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759708AbXFQTsU (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 15:48:20 -0400 To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Al Viro , Bernd Schmidt , Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar , Daniel Hazelton , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 References: <20070614195517.GA4933@elte.hu> <20070614235004.GA14952@elte.hu> <20070615011012.6c09066e@the-village.bc.nu> <20070615012623.GA25189@elte.hu> <20070615101007.0cbfd078@the-village.bc.nu> <4673CA7C.5040207@t-online.de> <20070616181902.GB21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> From: Alexandre Oliva Organization: Red Hat OS Tools Group Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 16:46:44 -0300 In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Sun\, 17 Jun 2007 12\:14\:46 -0700 \(PDT\)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.990 (gnu/linux) 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: 3053 Lines: 84 On Jun 17, 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> >> > What I care about is that the GPLv3 is a _worse_license_ than GPLv2, >> >> Even though anti-tivoization furthers the quid-pro-quo spirit that you >> love about v2, and anti-tivoization is your only objection to v3? > You apparently do not understand "quid-pro-quo". > Another way of stating it might be "same for same". > A third way of stating it is "software for software". No, the romans never > said that, but I just did, to make it just more obvious that the whole > point is that you are expected to answer IN KIND! Yes. And this was precisely what meant when I wrote "quid-pro-quo" above. > If you don't understand it after the above, I really can only say: > "You are either terminally stupid, or you're not allowing yourself > to see an obvious argument, because it destroys your world-view". > The latter is very possible. It's a very human thing. /me hands Linus a mirror Serious, what's so hard to understand about: no tivoization => more users able to tinker their formerly-tivoized computers => more users make useful modifications => more contributions in kind ? Sure, there's a downside too: no tivoization => fewer contributions from manufacturers that demand on tivoization My perception is that the first easily dominates the second, and so you are better off without tivoization. > it is also possible that they are of average intelligence, and they > just cannot mentally _afford_ to follow the argument - it destroys > the silyl stories they heard as children, and requires them to think > too hard about the veracity of the source. > PS. Since some people talked about the game theory aspects of > "tit-for-tat", I'd like to point out that what is usually considered an > even *better* strategy than "tit-for-tat" is actually "tit-for-tat with > forgiveness". > In particular, "tit-for-tat with forgiveness" is considered better when > there is ambiguity (like "communication difficulties" - does that sound > familiar?) in the encouter. You allow some leeway, and don't always > retaliate! > So the FSF is DOING THE WRONG THING! They are turning "tit-for-tat" not > into "tit-for-tat with forgiveness", but into "tit-for-tat with preemptive > strikes". Wrong. It enables copyright holders to decide whether forgiveness is appropriate, rather than forcing them to forgive. Being forced to forgive deception is not tit-for-tat, and it's a losing strategy. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} - 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/