Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757718AbXFSLu1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:50:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756656AbXFSLuT (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:50:19 -0400 Received: from 24-75-174-210-st.chvlva.adelphia.net ([24.75.174.210]:49314 "EHLO sanosuke.troilus.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754397AbXFSLuS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:50:18 -0400 To: =?utf-8?Q?Hans-J=C3=BCrgen?= Koch Cc: Alexandre Oliva , Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar , Daniel Hazelton , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Chris Friesen , Bernd Schmidt , Robin Getz , Rob Landley , Bron Gondwana , Al Viro Subject: Re: mea culpa on the meaning of Tivoization References: <200706182331.19571.hjk@linutronix.de> <200706191022.21869.hjk@linutronix.de> From: Michael Poole Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:50:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200706191022.21869.hjk@linutronix.de> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Hans-J?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=BCrgen?= Koch"'s message of "Tue\, 19 Jun 2007 10\:22\:21 +0200") Message-ID: <878xagups6.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1761 Lines: 35 Hans-Jürgen Koch writes: > No. Credible licenses should be simple like physical laws. Newton's law > is expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. That's why it's > still valid, and you still learn it at school although meanwhile people > know that there are limitations to it. > > If you come up with a new version of a license every year, you will only > weaken it. Please note that quantum mechanics is _not_ such a hole-plugging > addition to Newton's law. It's a new simple physical law, expressed in terms > of a single simple mathematical equation that contains the old law as a > border case. If that were not the case, it would have never been accepted. This is an excellent example of how engineers tend to mis-analyze legal issues. In law, neither simple wording nor interpretation is so simple or so mechanical as the things engineers prefer to work with. Take an example: "Thou shalt not kill". Very clear, but also very problematic in that it does not address military conquests (which were apparently approved by that law's drafter), self-defense, or a number of other cases. There are always grey areas between what is explicitly addressed and what is not. Courts interpret laws and precedent in ways that make life (and license or contract writing) more unpredictable. Wishing otherwise will not make a simple license unambiguous. If those areas of ambiguity are exploited enough, the perceived cost of having a hole will exceed the perceived cost of plugging it. Michael Poole - 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/