Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

Stephen Clark
2006-09-29T14:02:13Z

Helge Hafting wrote:

>Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>
>>On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 12:31 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>The GPLv3 rewords it in an attempt to be clearer but also I think rather
>>>more over-reaching. It's not clear what for example happens with a
>>>rented device containing GPL software but with DRM on the hardware.
>>>Thats quite different to owned hardware. GPLv2 leaves it open for the
>>>courts to make a sensible decision per case, GPLv3 tries to define it in
>>>advance and its very very hard to define correctly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Also the prevention of running modified versions is not only caused by
>>economic interests and business models. There are also scenarios where
>>it is simply necessary:
>>
>>- The liability for damages, where the manufacturer of a device might
>>be responsible in case of damage when he abandoned the prevention. This
>>applies to medical devices as well as to lasers, machine tools and many
>>more. Device manufacturers can not necessarily escape such liabilities
>>as it might be considered grossly negligent to hand out the prevention
>>key, even if the user signed an exemption from liability.
>>
>>
>>
>This seems silly to me. Sure, lasers and medical equipment is
>dangerous if used wrong. When such equipment is
>controlled by software, then changing that software brings
>huge responsibility. But it shouldn't be made impossible.
>
>They can provide the key, with the warning that _using_ it
>means you are on your own and take all responsibility.
>
>I can take the covers off a cd player and let the laser
>shine into the room. Nothing prevents me from doing
>that, it isn't welded shut or anything. And it might
>be useful if I ever need a laser beam. Of course I am
>then responsible if I take someone's eye out. CD players
>have warning labels about this. And the same can be done
>for the keys to dangerous software.
>
>
>>- Regulations to prevent unauthorized access to radio frequencies, which
>>is what concerns e.g. cellphone manufacturers.
>>
>>
>>
>Unauthorized use is illegal and easy enough to track down.
>No special protection is needed. And it cannot be enforced
>by making the phones har to modify - any radio amateur knows
>how to build from scratch a transmitter to jam the GSM bands
>if he should be inclined to do so. Anyone can look this up in
>books too.
>
>Helge Hafting
>-
>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/
>
>
>
Amen!

--

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Ben Franklin)

"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty
decreases." (Thomas Jefferson)