3 ms·
With the "or later" version it's a concern that in the future someone nefarious could gain control of the FSF, and publish a GPL removing most of the copyleft p
by RobotToaster 7mo ago
With the "or later" version it's a concern that in the future someone nefarious could gain control of the FSF, and publish a GPL removing most of the copyleft provisions.
On the other hand, if Linux had used the "or later" version it could have helped prevent TiVoization.
- bonoboTP 7mo agoNo because tivo could take it under the gpl2. It's not an auto upgrade. The new version is optional.
- gzread 7mo agoNew distros and modules could be v3-or-later.
- hmry 7mo ago> if Linux had used the "or later" version it could have helped prevent TiVoization Only if the hardware manufacturer used a combined work of Linux and some GPLv3-only code, no? Otherwise, if Linux was GPLv2-or-later, they could just use it under GPLv2 terms and tivoize.
- sellmesoap 7mo agoGPL Vader license, pray I do not alter the deal any further.
- pabs3 7mo agoAccording to Conservancy; Tivo didn't do "Tivoization", the GPLv3 doesn't prevent what Tivo actually did, and both GPLv2/GPLv3 prevent "Tivoization". https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-the-gpl-right-to-install/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t... https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Safely-Copylefted-Cars-Reexamining-GPLv3-Installation-Information-Requirements-ALS-Bradley-Kuhn-Behan-Webster-1.pdf https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017...
- gzread 7mo agoLinus now has come to support Tivoization. I presume this has something to do with where his salary comes from.
- samtheprogram 7mo agoLinus never cared about that use case of the GPL. He cared about the source code sharing.
- kube-system 7mo agoAnti-Tivoization is a pretty radical idea that restricts the rights of hardware developers for the benefit of software developers. Linus doesn't really care about strong-arming hardware developers the way RMS does. He just cares about the software.
- gzread 7mo agoThe entire GPL is a radical idea that restricts the rights of software developers for the benefit of software users.
- hn_acker 7mo ago> Anti-Tivoization is a pretty radical idea that restricts the rights of hardware developers for the benefit of software developers. How does anti-tivoization restrict the rights of hardware developers, considering that hardware developers can choose not to pre-install anti-tivoization-licensed/contracted software? Is it anti-tivoization that restricts the rights of hardware developers, or does copyright law do that?
- kube-system 7mo agoYou can also choose to not buy a TiVo? Imagine if the situation was the other way around and a CPU came with a hardware license agreement prohibiting any software that ran on it from validating hardware attributes, using encryption to communicate only with certain other pieces of hardware, or for that matter, any restrictions at all. All in the name of enabling hardware developers to tinker with their hardware without those pesky software developers getting in the way with their pesky encryption. > Is it anti-tivoization that restricts the rights of hardware developers, or does copyright law do that? In the way that all copyleft enforcement requires copyright, then yes… but what does that have to do with anything? I think Linus was spot on about the FSFs scope creep when he said: “The kernel license covers the kernel. It does not cover boot loaders and hardware, and as far as I'm concerned, people who make their own hardware can design them any which way they want.”