Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

Oleg Verych
2006-09-26T21:31:57Z

Hallo,

On 2006-09-25, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 20:51 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
>> Tolerance of binary blogs seems to be steadily dropping.
>>

[Binary bloGs. Yea, that's future of it (and XML) ;]

>> As far as I can tell, the DVD-CSS is purely a legal issue today - the
>> technical issues are solved (I can watch any-region on my Linux
>> computer, and in Australia, the law requires that all DVD players must
>> ignore region encoding as it is an anti-competitive practice).
>
> Tolerance by who? As far as I can tell tolerance for binary blobs by
> the typical Linux desktop user is higher than ever. They consider it a
> bug if their distro does not automagically install the nvidia/ATI
> drivers, and immediately write you off as a GPL zealot if you even
> mention that a tainted kernel cannot be debugged.

This is not what Linux all about, as far as i can understand, reading lkml.

Recall, please, linuxant MODULE_LICENSE("GPL\0 if bla-bla") case.
Poor linux users, happy with stupid devices at low bandwidth and
Working Drivers (tm).

NV/ATI's driver _users_ are the same, *it's cool to be a kung-fu hacker*
fashion. And don't tell me linux is desktop / game / home theater ready,
please. It's nearly an orthogonal world by purpose and needs. (IMHO, of course)

That fashion even affects Debian with all that firmware stuff. Invalid
users (who cannot manage to have Debian installed without firmware,
but loves it, server support for free or ever freedom; last is rare
already) are in damn higher priority, than a 15 years of Social Contract.

> Lee
>