Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757882AbXFTRfM (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:35:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754523AbXFTRe7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:34:59 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.178]:61768 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754110AbXFTRe6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:34:58 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=sEtl3j1LVvvgUkBw8N95ux+5yQh9NGj+N/KSJa+vlDgxWBiNDs6byds/na7VmQ97sRBBjaiwWNsPkCLY0HmrtAvQY64nUtVSc45UhWO6u9gQlOfuCzG/wbCeTO5ErD3cZNb30oIZ6YJ6/Hj7c+JbSMIxV0bg41/PNvIq8vRhcjg= Message-ID: <9a8748490706201034j43139301w5a18c172d688c724@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 19:34:57 +0200 From: "Jesper Juhl" To: "Alexandre Oliva" Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 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" 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: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1955 Lines: 40 On 19/06/07, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jun 18, 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > In the GPLv3 world, we have already discussed in this thread how you can > > follow the GPLv3 by making the TECHNICALLY INFERIOR choice of using a ROM > > instead of using a flash device. > > Yes. This is one option that doesn't bring any benefits to anyone. > It maintains the status quo for users and the community, but it loses > the ability for the vendor to upgrade, fix or otherwise control the > users. Bad for the vendor. > Also bad for the user since now the vendor can no longer supply updated firmware to fix bugs or otherwise improve the device. Also, the vendow has the problem that devices that get returned for repair or similar can't easily be updated software wise. For the vendor not to be able to update the box creates a lot of problems for both the vendor and the end user. > As another option, the vendor can respect users' freedoms, and then > everybody wins big. That's the option that anti-tivoization provides > economic incentive for vendors to take. Sure, they may still prefer > the alternative above, or stick with an older version (which has its > costs), or move to different software (which also has its costs), but > it's unreasonable to claim that I'm advocating for vendors to move to > ROM. > I am fairly confident that if too much software switches to GPLv3 we'll see a lot of businesses move to BSD or proprietary software. That means *we* lose bigtime. -- Jesper Juhl Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/