linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] USB: mark USB drivers as being GPL only

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: <47AB1A3E.3040703@davidnewall.com>
Date:	Fri, 08 Feb 2008 01:18:30 +1030
From:	David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:	Diego Zuccato <diego@...llo.alma.unibo.it>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Christer Weinigel <christer@...nigel.se>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: mark USB drivers as being GPL only

Alan Cox wrote:
>> In Australia, devices require approval from a regulatory body.  Such
>> approval is withheld if appropriate safeguards are not applied.
>>     
>
> We were talking about the USA.

We most certainly were not.  We are talking about Linux, and everybody
wants it be used globally.

> I am not aware of any Australian answers
> to the specific question of software as an appropriate safeguard. The US
> requires appropriate safeguards but no court has actually established an
> interpretation of them.
>   
Probably the same in Australia, for the same reason as in USA.  Probably
the same in most countries.

>> That is what I was saying: To require that only GPL-licenced USB drivers
>> may be used with Linux puts Linux at a disadvantage in the market.  The
>>     
>
> Diddums, thats what the license says.
That's what you claim it says, but has any court, anywhere, agreed with
you?  You claim the authority of others (i.e. numerous lawyers), but I
don't believe you have that authority.  You're just starting hearsay. 
You've never said what lawyers and you've never told us what they
actually said.

I see that you have a clear political agenda, and I respect it in
principle, but you're claiming that things are so in pursuit of that
agenda when you don't *know* that they are.  You don't need to stretch
any truths to spread adoption of GPL, and doing so is not respectable.


>  Requiring ac cinema pays the movie
> company puts a cinema at a disadvantage in the market from those who
> don't pay. That is why we have laws to try and ensure that crime is not
> profitable.
I don't understand this, but I do understand that an essential question
being considered is whether or not Linux can participate in a market
that prohibits GPL drivers, whether explicitly, or more likely through
pressure from regulatory bodies.  Doing this would be a mistake. 
Probably a big one.

Don't telling people to switch to BSD, as some have done; they might do
it.  Where would Linux be if embedded devices used BSD instead?  Don't
think they can't.  Don't think Linux has a technical advantage.  Lose
the embedded market, and that's where it would be felt first, and Linux
volumes fall by what?  50%?  90%?  Would you care if servers followed?
--
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/