On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 11:56:24PM +0100, Steve Long wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > >> > So, what is the problem here? The kernel is not going to change > >> > licenses any time soon, so I don't understand your objections. > >> > > >> I think the point is that people who oppose this kind of thing (yes, > >> including me) would rather _our_ contributions were under GPLv3. Yet at > >> the moment, we effectively have no choice. > > > > That is _totally_ different than the case which was specifically brought > > up about the whole "tivo" issue and the Linux kernel. > > > > Ebuilds are different, I have no opinion on that (but I do know that the > > DRM issues mean nothing for them, that only pertains to the kernel). > > > OK, but what about a corporation selling Gentoo-based tivo boxes? Updates > are carried out as, say, binary images, and they continue to use all the > flexibility of Gentoo (built by its users, and devs who are also users) > while curtailing Gentoo users' rights.
As you have control over the kernel, just replace it with something you can use to circumvent the drm issue. Quite simple to do, no GPLv3 issues involved at all :) Remember, if you can replace the kernel, you 0wn the whole box full stop. That is why the v3 DRM issues really only affect the kernel, and we (the linux kernel developers) were explicitly told this by the FSF to our faces. thanks, greg k-h -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
