On 2007-06-19 20:23:00, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > If you take the Wikipedia definition of Tivoization, you'll see it's > about copyleft software only, and no law mandates the use of copyleft > software. There's no end to bad laws, but a law that mandated the use > of copyleft (=> free) software and at the same time prohibited > modifications by the user would be a very contradictory one.
You're absolutely right... Nobody forces us to use Linux in the credit-card terminals I'm currently working on; of course we could have selected a proprietary solution (and we would be forced to, were the Linux kernel and/or certain crucial libraries or utilities GPLv3 only). Only, your statement above seems to run counter to your previous claims that the "anti-tivoisation" provisions of GPLv3 would bring _more_ developers to copyleft software. So which one is it? Cheers Anders - 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/
