Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755574AbXFUE1F (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:27:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751849AbXFUE0z (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:26:55 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:58479 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751651AbXFUE0y (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:26:54 -0400 To: david@lang.hm Cc: Andrew McKay , Alan Cox , Linus Torvalds , Al Viro , Bernd Schmidt , Ingo Molnar , Daniel Hazelton , 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 References: <20070614235004.GA14952@elte.hu> <20070615011012.6c09066e@the-village.bc.nu> <20070615012623.GA25189@elte.hu> <20070615101007.0cbfd078@the-village.bc.nu> <4673CA7C.5040207@t-online.de> <20070616181902.GB21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> <4679557C.5080907@iders.ca> <20070620175627.319a6c55@the-village.bc.nu> <46797C52.4020907@iders.ca> From: Alexandre Oliva Organization: Red Hat OS Tools Group Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 01:26:02 -0300 In-Reply-To: (david@lang.hm's message of "Wed\, 20 Jun 2007 14\:16\:57 -0700 \(PDT\)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.990 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2035 Lines: 46 On Jun 20, 2007, david@lang.hm wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 >> >> On Jun 20, 2007, Andrew McKay wrote: >> >>> However, I don't see how this would ever require a company like Tivo >>> or Mastercard to have their networks play nice with a unit that has >>> been modified by the end user, potentially opening up some serious >>> security holes. >> >> Which is why the GPLv3 doesn't make the requirement that you stated. > so if the BIOS checked the checksum of the boot image and if it found > it wasn't correct would disable the video input hardware but let you > boot the system otherwise it would be acceptable to you and the GPLv3? I don't think so, but IANAL. What do you think? Here's what I think to be the relevant passages. [...] The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made. [...] The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a requirement to continue to provide support service, warranty, or updates for a work that has been modified or installed by the recipient, or for the User Product in which it has been modified or installed. Network access may be denied when the modification itself materially and adversely affects the operation of the network or violates the rules and protocols for communication across the network. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} - 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/