Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765524AbXFSUCr (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:02:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761969AbXFSUCh (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:02:37 -0400 Received: from DELFT.AURA.CS.CMU.EDU ([128.2.206.88]:54059 "EHLO delft.aura.cs.cmu.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759139AbXFSUCg (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:02:36 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:01:56 -0400 To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: Linus Torvalds , 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 Message-ID: <20070619200156.GA8812@delft.aura.cs.cmu.edu> Mail-Followup-To: Alexandre Oliva , Linus Torvalds , 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 References: <20070619012517.GL14788@delft.aura.cs.cmu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: Jan Harkes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1362 Lines: 31 On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 02:40:59AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > The actual software is mailed to you on a credit card sized > > ROM when you activate service. ... > The GPLv3 won't remove every way in which people who want/need to stop > the user from making changes to the software could accomplishing this > (ROM). It will just make this a bit more inconvenient, such that > vendors that have the option respect users' freedoms, and those that > find it too inconvenient respect the wishes of users who don't want > their software turned non-free. I am trying to read that last sentence and it just doesn't seem to make any sense. Or are you saying that all that anti-tivoization language that adds complex requirements which change depending on the market some device happens to be sold in and which will most likely make GPLv3 software unusable for various applications ranging from medical equipment to financial transaction systems (and probably others) is there to just make it a _bit_ more inconvenient for vendors to implement a tivo-like scheme? So what exactly is the point of all this then? Jan - 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/