3 ms·
TBF if Google locked down the devices like that it would be a GPL violation. Not their first or whatever but still, there's a reason for them not to do that bes
by singpolyma3 4mo ago
TBF if Google locked down the devices like that it would be a GPL violation. Not their first or whatever but still, there's a reason for them not to do that beside "being nice"
- yjftsjthsd-h 4mo agoWould it? IANAL, but AIUI the only GPL component is Linux on GPLv2 which requires providing code but not giving the ability to install it
- singpolyma3 4mo agoYes. GPLv2 specifically contains a clause that you must provide "scripts to control compilation and installation" Source you can't compile or install onto the device wouldn't be very useful.
- fluidcruft 4mo agoNot really. Tivo did that eons ago. Whether you view this as a "flaw" or "feature" of GPLv2 it's ultimately why GPLv3 now exists. The Linux kernel developers see what Tivo did as a "feature" rather than a "flaw" and refuse GPLv3.
- wolvoleo 4mo agoIt's also because so many Linux developers are on the payroll of big tech. Look at all the submissions. 95% are just big tech. And look at the key people in the Linux Foundation. All a bunch of business suits with compromised motives. Serving their company above the community. There's only a few unencumbered people in there now. Linux is no longer the community-driven choice. It's big business with billions hanging on the line. The grassroots origins are long over.
- singpolyma3 4mo agoTiVo never prevented installing your own build in the device. They only prevented running their proprietary app on top of it when you had done so.