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]

Message-ID: <52052.192.54.193.51.1181907121.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:32:01 +0200 (CEST)
From:	"Nicolas Mailhot" <nicolas.mailhot@...oste.net>
To:	"Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Cc:	"Daniel Hazelton" <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3


Le Ven 15 juin 2007 12:53, Jesper Juhl a écrit :
> On 15/06/07, Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@...oste.net> wrote:
>> >> > by your argument, the user has some "right to modify the
>> software", on
>> >> > that piece of hardware it bought which had free software on it,
>> correct?
>> >>
>> >> Yes.  This means the hardware distributor who put the software in
>> >> there must not place roadblocks that impede the user to get where
>> she
>> >> wants with the software, not that the vendor must offer the user
>> a
>> >> sport car to take her there.
>>
>> >Okay. That means that if I ship Linux on a ROM chip I have to
>> somehow
>> make
>> >it so that the person purchasing the chip can modify the copy of
>> Linux
>> >installed on the chip *if* I want to follow both the spirit and the
>> letter
>> >of the GPLv2.
>>
>> The key word there is "can"
>>
>> You don't have to send the buyer the hardware design, replace the
>> ROM
>> with a flash, use a rom socket that allows easy switching etc.
>>
>> But you can not add measures to your hardware specifically designed
>> to
>> stop the user from modifying the GPL software part. Especially if
>> those measures are something like DRM that do not make the tinkering
>> just technically hard, but legally forbidden.
>>
>> As long as the restrictions result from technical choices not
>> targetted at forbidding changes you're ok.
>>
> That's simply not true.
>
> As long as you get a copy of the source code for the software that's
> running on the hardware it's OK. That's all the GPLv2 says.

You'll note I was answering to a message about what the GPL intended,
not the strict literal reading of the GPLv2 words.

And what the GPL authors intended is obvious from the fact it all
started with a printer driver and the need to change the software used
to control this particular hardware (not some mythical other device
without manufacturer restrictions

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

-
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/