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: <orhcp3zk5o.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:52:51 -0300
From:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
To:	"David Schwartz" <davids@...master.com>
Cc:	"Linux-Kernel\@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Jun 19, 2007, "David Schwartz" <davids@...master.com> wrote:

>> Right.  All GPL can say is that you cannot impose further restrictions
>> on how the user adapts the software, and since the user runs the
>> software on that computer, that means you must not restrict the user's
>> ability to upgrade or otherwise replace that software there, when you
>> gave the user the software along with the computer.

> You keep smuggling in the same assumption without ever defending it. There
> is a user. There is a person who gets to decide what software runs on a
> particular piece of hardware. You keep assuming they must be the same
> person.

No, I'm just saying that whoever gets to decide cannot restrict the
user's freedoms as to the software the user received.

Consider this:

I get GPLed software.

I make improvements to it.

I give it to you, but I leave out the sources of my changes.

You ask me for sources, because without them you can't enjoy the
freedom to adapt the software.

I say "No, they're mine.  I have the right to keep them and release
them however I like.  Copyright law says so.!

You talk to the copyright holder, and he revokes my license and gets a
court order such that I can't distribute the software any more.

You see?  It's not because I had a right that I can use it to impose
restrictions on your freedoms, after I distribute the software to you.

Right to control what software runs on the hardware is no different.
For any hardware on which I can run the software, I'm a user there,
and I'm entitled to the rights granted by the license.

It's really this simple.  Don't complicate the issue by trying to make
hardware special.  It's just an illusion to try to convince yourself
that you can deprive users of freedoms provided by the GPL.

-- 
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/