Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

[Stephen Clark <Stephen.Clark@seclark.us>]

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)



-
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/