linux-kernel - Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:59:31 +0200
From:	"Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
To:	"Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	"Alexandre Oliva" <aoliva@...hat.com>,
	"Daniel Hazelton" <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>,
	"debian developer" <debiandev@...il.com>, david@...g.hm,
	"Tarkan Erimer" <tarkan@...one.net.tr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On 15/06/07, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > Why can't you understand that the GPL v2 is a *software* license, it
> > doesn't cover hardware at all.
>
> The GPLv2 is a copyright license not a software licence, indeed there is
> no such thing as a 'software licence'. It deals with the circumstances
> and manner in which you are permitted (by the author) to make copies of
> their work, to modify their work and in some cases to perform their work
> (plus other sundry rights). Copyright law doesn't care whether the object
> in question is as abstract as computer source code (providing it has been
> 'fixated' in some form) or a two hundred foot high art installation - or
> a combination of the two.
>

Right. My bad.

> So irrespective of the whole pointless debate going on you are trying to
> draw lines that don't exist in the first place.
>
> > I can't know for a fact what TiVO wants, but I can guess.
>
> You could also do your research.
>
I have absolutely no idea where to go look something like that up :-(

> > All quite valid reasons in my opinion.
>
> and all wrong.
>
> Look up the owning and controlling interests in Tivo and you'll find the
> correct reason - stopping you doing evil things like keeping movies
> you've recorded or uploading them to the internet [which ironically of
> course is the entire effect of the whole 'convergence' thing]
>
Hmm, wouldn't that be my guess nr. 2?  A way to use the hardware to
break the law...


Anway, the whole point of my post was mainly to /try/ and say that the
GPL gives you a right to obtain source code for modifications, but it
doesn't say anything about being able to run a compiled version of
that source on any specific hardware.


-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/