Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932177AbXFRTA7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:00:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932139AbXFRTAY (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:00:24 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]:29335 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765983AbXFRTAV (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:00:21 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=oPXOzrl6ux7GcbTjR3MJxsqGHf//tdXVvkplIpTOOaqY9nt37076qIq3LZI2//Fmpe3QItxOXSL9ocvrUj1o4dgG7uWAVnhywrDAuMxfEGawYOVM6Y62hirdtMy1PpepBfGbFVBHPvySPiYcxxBDogvD4srz0jVsXJylM1W6CjU= Message-ID: <161717d50706181200p304e5ca0ib83733395415e0f7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:00:20 -0400 From: "Dave Neuer" To: "Alexandre Oliva" Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Cc: "Greg KH" , "Al Viro" , "Daniel Hazelton" , "Bron Gondwana" , "Ingo Molnar" , "Alan Cox" , "Linus Torvalds" , "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: <200706161817.36657.dhazelton@enter.net> <200706162306.14516.dhazelton@enter.net> <20070617051451.GD21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> <20070618154549.GB6041@kroah.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 842e09ef8ed443bd Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2202 Lines: 44 On 6/18/07, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > Seriously, looking only at the downside of anti-tivoization (tivoizer > might turn us down), without even acknowledging that, should the > tivoizer change practice and respect users' freedoms, you'd be able to > get far more contributions from all those users, is typical minimax > strategy. > Every time you enable someone to disrespect other users' freedoms WRT > your software, you cut yourself out of some contributions that user > could make. Even if you completely disregard the moral and ethical > aspects of software freedom, the open source mentality inherently > depends on the notion of respect for others' freedoms. You only reap > the benefits of open source when the user gets the freedoms respected. Alexandre, while I backed you up on the whole "spirit of the GPL hasn't changed" thing, I think you are wrong here. As Jesper, Johannes and others have already pointed out (in a couple of the very few cogent non-flames since this thread started), we undoubtedly get more back in the form of software contributions from paid developers of TiVO-like companies than from the very few end users with the skill to hack the software or the inclination to aquire said skill. The simple fact is that most end users of most electronic devices don't care about the Freeness of the software, they care if their device works. If you disregard the ethical dimension, I think it's hard to argue w/ a straight face that Linus' stance is wrong from a pragmatic standpoint. The problem is that the people saying "just don't buy TiVOs" know full well that because the number of end users who care is so small, they have _no_ economic power to change the situation, and that's why people who do consider this an ethical issue want to leverage the power the copyright holders have both legally and by virtue of their expertise to force the hardware vendors to cooperate w/ end users. Dave - 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/