[U-Boot] U-book and GPLv3? (fwd)

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>]

On 00:50 Fri 26 Jun     , Richard Stallman wrote:
>     If I use a GPLv3 bootloader in a medical tool, a car, Point of payment terminal,
>     Military System, etc... it is a grave security flaw.
>     I'm not sure that you will be very happy if someone can modify the Firmware
>     freely. As you may loose money to be killed and at the extrem kill millions
>     of people.
> 
> There is no need to exaggerate.  Millions of people modify cars
> physically, and it is not a dangerous practice.
It is.
> 
> If you buy a car, or a medical tool for my own use, you deserve to be able
> to change the software in it, just as you can change it physically.

Certanly not when you use your car your are also on the public domain (road)
so it your car have a system faillure you can kill yourself and kill other
people. Remember that you are not allow to modify your car as your wish there
is law that will forbiden you to do this in a lot' of country.
> 
> The other systems that you speak of are not consumer products, so this
> requirement in GPLv3 does not apply to them.
in a Point of payment terminal it does not apply are sure?
There are distributed to storekeeper and you use your credit card in there
shop. So in your idea they modify it and if they stole your credit card number
and secret code and then stole your money. No Way
> 
>     I do not think the v3 is a benefit. I'll never accept the concept to an
>     opensource licence that will force me to use a software in a specific way that
>     someone will choose for me as do the v3. It will be freedom kill.
> 
> You seem to be worried about something you haven't described clearly.
> I think you're afraid of shadows, but since you have not described
> them clearly, I really don't know.
as example with the v3 you force me to give you my private key that I use
to protect the product this is not acceptable
> 
> All I can say is that no version of the GPL was meant to be an open
> source license.  Thinking of it in terms of "open source" will tend to
> be an obstacle to understanding it.
Sorry you only think about yourself and your interest, I respect the GPLv2 and
the work have been done around. But the GPLv3 is an extremism that I do not
want to go.

Best Regards,
J.