Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761772AbXFTDl7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:41:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759291AbXFTDlw (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:41:52 -0400 Received: from dsl081-033-126.lax1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([64.81.33.126]:39903 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758833AbXFTDlv (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:41:51 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:40:41 -0700 (PDT) From: david@lang.hm X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Alexandre Oliva cc: Linus Torvalds , Al Viro , Bernd Schmidt , Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar , Greg KH , debian developer , Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <200706190221.09067.dhazelton@enter.net> <200706190258.56955.dhazelton@enter.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1775 Lines: 41 On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jun 19, 2007, david@lang.hm wrote: > >> if you also make the assumption that the company won't use propriatary >> software instead then I think you would get agreement. > > Ah, good point. When I posed the one of the two cases of the inicial > scenario as "no tivoization", I meant Free Software without > constraints. > >> but the disagrement is over this exact assumption. you assume that >> these companies will use non-tivoized products if you make it hard >> to use the software covered by the GPL, most other people are saying >> that they disagree and the result would be fewer companies useing >> software covered by GPL instead. > > I understand that. And what I'm saying is that, even if fewer such > companies use GPLed software, you may still be better off, out of > additional contributions you'll get from customers of companies that > switch from tivoization to unconstrained Free Software, because of the > additional costs of the alternatives. > > And no, I can't prove it, but it's good that at least the argument is > no longer completely disregarded while something else is disputed. > > > Now that you guys at least understand what the argument is, you can > figure out the solution by yourselves. good, if you are no longer going to claim that your opinion on this unprovable point is the Truth (not the capitol) hopefully you can accept that a lot of very smart people are convinced that you are wrong on this point and not just 'confused' David Lang - 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/