Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758246AbXFSP2j (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:28:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755097AbXFSP2b (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:28:31 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.168]:33006 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755041AbXFSP2a (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:28:30 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=gdX+fW8TW6ttiDK+rOvt3F9Qn2WwZ7HzIuZ+xwP7+EbX880qvZqv+kiOtAU9d7L657XNnMoLrbIXfmFqSk9SNn6r3FxEtxI3PXeEvHWrtwuB1/5nZA8bjxN5IY/AZir9hIwOL1m1zL9dBD3UMov+YA+MR5j0n9opY4spCLjAoyY= Message-ID: <4677F616.3080406@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:28:22 +0400 From: Manu Abraham User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070306) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lennart Sorensen CC: Alexandre Oliva , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , debian developer , "david@lang.hm" , Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 References: <20070610160531.GA12179@kroah.com> <20070612184110.GB7980@kroah.com> <20070613211432.GH10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <20070614175305.GI10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> In-Reply-To: <20070614175305.GI10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1764 Lines: 35 Lennart Sorensen wrote: > Well much as I don't like what Tivo did with only allowing signed > kernels to run, I don't see anything in the above that says they can't Well, it is not Tivo alone -- look at http://aminocom.com/ for an example. If you want the kernel sources pay USD 50k and we will provide the kernel sources, was their attitude. > do that. They let you have the code and make changes to it, they just > don't let you put that changed stuff on the device they build. The > software is free, even though the hardware is locked down. The GPL v3 > really seems to change the spirit to try and cover usage and hardware > behaviour, while the spirit of the GPL v2 seemed to me at least to > simply be to allow people to copy and change and use the code, and pass > that on to people. It didn't have anything to do with what they did > with it on hardware. Nothing prevents you from taking tivos kernel > changes and building your own hardware to run that code on, and as such > the spirit of the GPL v2 seems fulfilled. It covers freedom of the > source code and resulting binaries, not of the platform you run it on. > The GPL v3 has a much broader coverage of what it wants to control, > which to me means the spirit is different. > > I don't have a tivo, I use mythtv on my own PC. Tivo doesn't force you > to buy their hardware after all. Well, it is not Tivo alone, a large chunk of the vendors do that. The vendors who actually do it the clean way are just few and can be counted very easily. - 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/