| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 12:31:34 +0100 From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> Cc: Michiel de Boer <x@...elhomicide.demon.nl>, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: GPLv3 Position Statement Ar Llu, 2006-09-25 am 20:51 +1000, ysgrifennodd Neil Brown: > The 'DRM' provision of the proposed GPLv3 seem to be being driven by 1 > company - Tivo. Yes, what they are doing is against our spirit of Actually quite a few companies have done this, and in some cases have been involved in out of court settlements over that kind of abuse. Let's be clear about this. The GPLv2 covers the scripts etc for installation. The DRM keys are probably covered, and out of court settlements lend weight to that. It has always been my publically stated position that I reserve the right to sue anyone who uses my code and locks it away with keys. The GPLv3 rewords it in an attempt to be clearer but also I think rather more over-reaching. It's not clear what for example happens with a rented device containing GPL software but with DRM on the hardware. Thats quite different to owned hardware. GPLv2 leaves it open for the courts to make a sensible decision per case, GPLv3 tries to define it in advance and its very very hard to define correctly. Alan - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists