Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

Daniel Hazelton
2007-06-15T01:55:55Z

On Thursday 14 June 2007 18:45:07 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com> wrote:
> > Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net> wrote:
> >>> *AND* the GPL has never been about making the source available to
> >>> everyone - just to those that get the binaries.
> >>
> >> Exactly. Not even to the upstream distributor. That's where Linus'
> >> theory of tit-for-tat falls apart.
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > case 1: Upstream provides source, tivo modifies and distributes it
> > (to their customers).
> >
> > case 2: tivo provides source, end user modifies and distributes it
> > (possibly to their customers, maybe to friends, possibly even to
> > upstream).
> >
> > See? Tit for tat.
>
> case 2': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
> the hardware won't let him and gives up

Faulty logic. The hardware doesn't *restrict* you from *MODIFYING* any fscking
thing.

DRH

>
> Where's the payback, or the payforward?
>
> And then, tit-for-tat is about equivalent retaliation, an eye for an
> eye. Where's the retaliation here?
>
> If GPLv2 were tit-for-tat, if someone invents artifices to prevent the
> user from making the changes the user wants on the software, wouldn't
> it be "equivalent retaliation" to prevent the perpetrator from making
> the changes it wants on the software?

--
Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful.