Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760560AbXFUSGB (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:06:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758671AbXFUSFk (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:05:40 -0400 Received: from caffeine.uwaterloo.ca ([129.97.134.17]:56766 "EHLO caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756817AbXFUSFj (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:05:39 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:05:38 -0400 To: david@lang.hm Cc: Michael Poole , "H. Peter Anvin" , Tomas Neme , "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Message-ID: <20070621180538.GE10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: <87sl8ms9z5.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> <87k5tys8w5.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> <87645is82q.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> <20070621171612.GC10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <20070621174332.GD10008@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> 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: lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2445 Lines: 49 On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:51:06AM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote: > you snippede the bit about not knowing how to stop it I did? As far as I can tell I quoted it all. What did I miss? > they call the section the anti-tivoization, how much more explicit can > they get? They could be as explicit as: You can't use this code if you cooporate with anyone that requires DRM systems. All their attempts to define user devices and such is just going to screw up and miss some things they wanted covered, and disallow things they didn't intend to disallow (assuming there is any such thing). > by the way, just in case anyone is misunderstanding me. I don't believe > for a moment that all these anti-tamper features actually work in the real > world (the PS3 hacking kits are proof of the lengths people will go to to > make the 'hard' hardware-level hacking trivial to do) but the approach > needs to be at secure modulo hardware tampering or software bugs. DRM is completely pointless. It only stops casual end users from doing things. It doesn't stop anyone with any technical clue from doing things. I keep hoping one day the people in charge at the big media companies will understand this, and stop asking for people to implement it. Of course in the mean time there are companies perfectly willing to claim to have unbreakable DRM for sale, while knowing full well (if they are competent) that it is a lie. So as long as the people in charge at big media are clueless about technology, and as long as there are companies willing to lie to them for money, then we will probably continue to have DRM crap to deal with. I don't think the GPLv3 is the place to try to remove DRM. What the FSF should be doing is try to educate the people who are advocating the use of DRM about the fact that it can't ever work. You can make more and more stupid laws about how people can't remove the DRM, but people who break copyright obviously already are breaking the law, so what is the point in having more lows for them to break. That is where this problem should be fought, not in the GPLv3. The GPLv3 is never going to solve the problem, only educating people can do that. -- Len Sorensen - 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/