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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:40:41 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1@...nline.de>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	debian developer <debiandev@...il.com>,
	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 Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> On Jun 19, 2007, david@...g.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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/