From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932176AbWBBRIT (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2006 12:08:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932178AbWBBRIT (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2006 12:08:19 -0500 Received: from [85.8.13.51] ([85.8.13.51]:17131 "EHLO smtp.drzeus.cx") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932176AbWBBRIS (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2006 12:08:18 -0500 Message-ID: <43E23C79.8050606@drzeus.cx> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:08:09 +0100 From: Pierre Ossman User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060128) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Alan Cox , Karim Yaghmour , Filip Brcic , Glauber de Oliveira Costa , Thomas Horsten , linux-kernel Subject: Re: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders References: <43DE57C4.5010707@opersys.com> <5d6222a80601301143q3b527effq526482837e04ee5a@mail.gmail.com> <200601302301.04582.brcha@users.sourceforge.net> <43E0E282.1000908@opersys.com> <43E1C55A.7090801@drzeus.cx> <1138891081.9861.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Alan Cox wrote: > > >> On Iau, 2006-02-02 at 01:00 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >>> Sure, DRM may mean that you can not _install_ or _run_ your changes on >>> somebody elses hardware. >>> >> Last time I checked the Xbox was owned by the person who bought it. Xbox >> Linux hits this problem today. So it may affect "your hardware" too >> unless you make hardware, which is an unusual and privileged position. >> > > Ok, now replace "hardware" by "software", and replace DRM by > "proprietary", and what's the difference? > > The fact is, if you buy proprietary software, you cannot make it do > everything you want, regardless of of whether you "own" it or not. The > creator of the software may have designed it so that it only does certain > things. > > Tough. The solution: use open source software. > > The same holds true for hardware. If you buy proprietary hardware, you > cannot make it do everything you want, whether you "own" it or not. The > manufacturer of the hardware may have designed it so that it only does > certain things. > > Tough. The solution: use open hardware. > > So taking open software and closed hardware and combining it into something that I cannot modify is ok by you? But since you support GPLv2 I take it you do not find it ok to take open software and closed software and combine that into something that I cannot modify. Personally, I consider both equal violations of the rights I seek to protect when I license my code under the GPL. > The solution is NOT to create a software license that is obviously not > usable. And the GPLv3 really _is_ obviously not usable for the kernel, > because it creates insane situations whether the hardware is open or > closed. > Just to make things clear, are you only having problems with the risk of forcing everyone to hand out their signing keys, or are you also opposed to preventing the hardware scenario above (provided it could be done without side-effects)? Rgds Pierre