On Wednesday 13 June 2007 22:04:04 Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jun 13, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Still doesn't explain why you have argued that the GPLv3 doesn't > > attempt to cover hardware and then provide proof that it does. > > It doesn't cover hardware, in the same way that it doesn't cover > patents, and it doesn't cover pro-DRM laws. It merely arranges, as > best as we've managed a copyright license to do, that they can't be > used as excuses (or tools) to disrespect the freedoms that the GPL > demands all licensees to respect for other users.
Consider this scenario: Small company A is manufacturing a new WiFi router. They decide to have it run HURD as the OS. In complying with the GPLv3 they supply the signing keys and everything else needed to install a new kernel on the hardware. User B buys the router and modifies the kernel so it drives the WiFi to an output power twice that which it is licensed to carry. FCC finds out and prosecutes User B for violating the regulations. FCC then pulls the small companies license until they change their hardware so the driver can't push it to transmit at a higher power level and levies a fine. Small company A loses the money paid on the fine, has to recall all the devices that can be modified (through software) to break the law at a massive cost *AND* has to redesign their hardware. The total cost drives the company into bankruptcy. Small companies C,D and E, in order to avoid the fate of small company A, purchases a license for proprietary OS "F" to drive their new hardware. Net loss: A lot of the users and publicity that "Free Software" used to get, because GPLv3 contains language that opens the companies to lawsuits that they wouldn't otherwise face. Which is better: Growing the base of installed GPL covered software, or "ethics and morals" that demand the language that has been added to the GPLv3 ? Personally I'd like to see proprietary software driven into a very small "niche" market or entirely out of existence. However much I want this to happen, I cannot be anything *BUT* scared of the GPLv3 simply because I see it creating massive problems - and all because of a *small* portion of the new language it contains. It has taken almost 15 years for "Free Software" to make a dent in the market, and, IMHO, a lot of that is both Linux and the "holes" in GPLv2. DRH -- Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
