2 ms·

Conservancy says the GPLv3 doesn't prevent a vendor from breaking their proprietary software when GPLv3 software is updated (which is what TiVo did, for GPLv2 s

• jsmith45 4y ago
  Unfortunately those slides directly contradict the blog post I linked, whose thesis is basically that the installation relevant difference between GPLv2 and GPLv3 is only that GPLv3 requires the proprietary software to continue to run (for "User Products"), and GPLv3 specifically requires the keys, but that both still require that end users have the ability to run modified versions of the GPL software on the device, either by giving keys, or by offering the ability to disable secure boot, etc. > [so], these words in GPLv3: “The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made.” mean that the proprietary software that is not a combined work with the GPLv3'd work must also function? > Stallman replied on 2012-05-06 with: > Absolutely. And I wrote it specifically to do that!