Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> writes:
> Besides, the people who inserted the DRM code explicitly gave you
> permission to modify it, so the whole point is moot. There's no
> "circumvention".
Yes, it is mostly clear, and indeed GPL3 seems a little bit over
engineered, but that doesn't mean that GPL2 could not have any
loopholes:
1. Release a kernel with builtin DRM for video. (For example HDCP [1])
Such DRM implementation is released under the GPL2 by copyright
holder A.
2. Distribute a modified kernel without DRM. Copyright holder A gave
you permission to do so, by the GPL2, everything is OK.
3. People can backup videos from copyright holder B using the modified
kernel.
4. Copyright holder B can sue you under the DMCA, for circumventing an
effective technological measure. It doesn't matter whatever license
copyright holder A gave you.
Regards,
Emilio
Footnotes:
[1] High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection. Currently you would
never get a license for a GPL implementation, but it's used as an
hypothetical example.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
