> > As a PS to the GPL3 comment here is the basic difference > > > > ROM - I can't modify the code on the device > > The creator can't modify the code further on the device > > > > Tivo - I can't modify the code on the device > > The owner can modify the code > > > > One is an implicit limitation of the hardware (just like I can't run > > openoffice on a 4MB PC even though the license gives me the right to > > try), the other is an artificial restriction. > > > > One case is witholding freedom in the GPL sense by one party while > > keeping it themselves, the other is a limitation of the system > > inevitably imposed on everyone. > > I've been following this discussion and I find this interesting. > Consider these two cases: > > 1.) I ship the device back to the manufacturer, they replace the ROM, > and ship it back to me. > > 2.) I ship the device back to the manufacturer, they load new code > into it, and ship it back to me. > > How do these two differ? Or is it now just a question of the ROM > being in a socket? I can't see how the technicalities of how the > hardware is constructed can change the legality of the software.
At first glance I think a construct where the manufacturer is obliged to load _MY_ modified software in a timely fashion and at a reasonable price into the device would fit my understanding of the GPL's spirit though this leaves room for the definition of timely... Best, Michael -- Technosis GmbH, Geschäftsführer: Michael Gerdau, Tobias Dittmar Sitz Hamburg; HRB 89145 Amtsgericht Hamburg Vote against SPAM - see http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/ Michael Gerdau email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
