Hi, Since I started this debate, i want to join it, because i learnt a lot and reached an opinion. On 10/17/06, Jinesh K J <jineshkj.newsletters@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10/17/06, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Can you point out in the license of the GPL where this is "violated"? This is exactly the problem here - even though the license is not violated legally, its purpose certainly is. GPL was made to make sure that the end user gets the same rights as the person who developed the software - the right to make changes to the source code as he wishes and to run it, to propagate it along with the same rights.
who said that is its purpose ? the kernel community accepts GPLv2 as it is. there is no hidden chapter about the GPL purpose. I must say that I support Tivo in that matter - they are protecting their hardware, not the software. allowing that is the very basic thing that made (and still makes) linux so popular and ubiqitous. blocking this freedom to protect your hardware will put a stick in the linux kernel wheels.
So you still feel that it should not happen to your desktop computer <-> just because that it won't ever happen to your system doesn't pull you back from raising your voices against any attempt to do this injustice towards users of other devices - whether its a supercomputer or a mini mp3 player.
not true. this is a principle argument, not about whose system is hurt. we want to let companies the right to make secured hardware. it should be their choice - after all, it is their profit. if they think they can sell secured desktop, be our guests. as long as they contribute to the kernel and keep spreading it, it's fine.
> > The main point is that RMS feels that the Tivo issue is big enough that > the GPL should be changed to prevent that from ever happening in the > future. So, don't you want to?
sorry, but, No ! Bye, Jakko
Regards, Jinesh.
-- Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel. Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/ FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
