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

Ingo Molnar
2007-06-15T11:31:54Z

* Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:

> > by your argument, the user has some "right to modify the software",
> > on that piece of hardware it bought which had free software on it,
> > correct?
>
> Yes. This means the hardware distributor who put the software in
> there must not place roadblocks that impede the user to get where she
> wants with the software, not that the vendor must offer the user a
> sport car to take her there.

see the slippery slope in action? Lets just use this limited concession
on your part and show that _even this_ leads to absurd results:

- a "roadblock" such as a too small button?

- a "roadblock" such as a soldered-on ROM instead of flash-ROM?

- a "roadblock" such as not opening up specifications to the hardware?

- a "roadblock" such as not releasing the source of the BIOS? (and here
dont come with a "but the BIOS is not under the GPL" strawman
argument. The Tivo hardware is not under the GPL license either! Your
whole argument was that even though the Tivo hardware's design is not
GPL-ed, if it runs free software it must not restrict the user's
rights and that it must offer the same rights as the hardware
manufacturer has. )

- a "roadblock" such as a virtual ROM implemented via an SHA1 key
embedded in the hardware?

each of these items limit your supposed "right to modify the software on
that exact hardware". Each of these items puts a "roadblock" in the way
and impedes the user to get where she wants with her software. So by
your argument each of these items would be forbidden. That is
nonsensical.

Ingo