[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7b69d1470706151802k20dcdefaj4634ebfd7126b66c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 20:02:28 -0500
From: "Scott Preece" <sepreece@...il.com>
To: "Alexandre Oliva" <aoliva@...hat.com>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Rob Landley" <rob@...dley.net>,
"Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Daniel Hazelton" <dhazelton@...er.net>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>,
"debian developer" <debiandev@...il.com>, david@...g.hm,
"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 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2007, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> How do these stop a user's exercise of the four freedoms of a piece of
> software licensed under the GPL?
---
I know you don't see it that way, but I still find it bizarre that
"the right to modify the software" should be construed as "implies the
right to modify the device that the software was shipped in".
I do agree that it's not a change in "spirit" - I'm sure the GPL
authors would have disliked TiVoization 15 years ago as much as they
do today, if they had thought about it (regardless of the Stallman
interview where he said he didn't care very much about devices).
However, whether it is a change "in spirit" or not, it clearly is a
qualitative change that substantially changes the rights granted under
the license and it's perfectly reasonable for some authors who liked
the GPLv2 to dislike and reject GPLv3.
scott
-
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