[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <or4pl96gvr.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:22:48 -0300
From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
To: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>
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\@lang.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 Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net> wrote:
> Faulty logic. The hardware doesn't *restrict* you from *MODIFYING*
> any fscking thing.
Ok, lemme try again:
case 2'': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
the hardware won't let him use the result of his efforts, and gives up
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 18:45:07 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> 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?
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@...dhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@...d.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
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