lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    Date
    On Saturday 16 June 2007 18:01:59 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
    > On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net> wrote:
    > > On Saturday 16 June 2007 04:21:04 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
    > >> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net> wrote:
    > >> > In the case of renting a machine you can try to legislate new laws all
    > >> > you want. It doesn't make a difference. There are certain rights you
    > >> > don't get when renting something that you do when you own it.
    > >>
    > >> You mean renting the computer with the software in it is not
    > >> distribution of the software?
    > >
    > > It is. But you don't have the same rights to a rented machine as you
    > > do to one you have purchased.
    >
    > That's true. But since it's distribution, the licensing terms of the
    > software in there must be followed, or the software must be removed.
    > It's really this simple.
    >
    > It's not about the hardware. It's about the software and what you
    > must not prevent others from doing with it.
    >
    > > And yes, they can even have terms in it that violate the GPL. Not
    > > that a "renters contract" ("rental agreement" or whatever they call
    > > them in your jurisdiction) that has those terms can *legally*
    > > violate the GPL - but it doesn't stop them from existing.
    >
    > By "legally violate the GPL", do you mean lawfully escape the terms of
    > the GPL, or that infringe the copyrights of the authors for violate
    > its legal terms? I hope it's the latter.

    Sorry, poor choice of words. I meant that they can violate the GPL, because
    they have the right to say "You can't modify the software on the device you
    are renting". I mis-stated it because I didn't make it clear that, even
    though that is their legal right, they would still be in violation of the
    GPL.

    The reason that it is different from the TiVO case is that they have not
    stopped you from doing any modification - what they have prevented is the use
    of those modifications on the hardware they designed. The response from the
    FSF and people like you (Alexandre) is childish - at best. "They have one of
    our toys in their house but we can't play with it. WAAAAH!"

    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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-06-17 00:29    [W:3.558 / U:0.164 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site