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:	Thu, 14 Jun 2007 21:55:33 -0400
From:	Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>
To:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	debian developer <debiandev@...il.com>,
	"david@...g.hm" <david@...g.hm>,
	Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@...one.net.tr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Thursday 14 June 2007 18:45:07 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com> wrote:
> > Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net> wrote:
> >>> *AND* the GPL has never been about making the source available to
> >>> everyone - just to those that get the binaries.
> >>
> >> Exactly.  Not even to the upstream distributor.  That's where Linus'
> >> theory of tit-for-tat falls apart.
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > case 1:  Upstream provides source, tivo modifies and distributes it
> > (to their customers).
> >
> > case 2: tivo provides source, end user modifies and distributes it
> > (possibly to their customers, maybe to friends, possibly even to
> > upstream).
> >
> > See?  Tit for tat.
>
> case 2': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
> the hardware won't let him and gives up

Faulty logic. The hardware doesn't *restrict* you from *MODIFYING* any fscking 
thing. 

DRH

>
> Where's the payback, or the payforward?
>
> And then, tit-for-tat is about equivalent retaliation, an eye for an
> eye.  Where's the retaliation here?
>
> If GPLv2 were tit-for-tat, if someone invents artifices to prevent the
> user from making the changes the user wants on the software, wouldn't
> it be "equivalent retaliation" to prevent the perpetrator from making
> the changes it wants on the software?



-- 
Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful.
-
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/