On Jun 14, 2007, Alan Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
>> covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of
>> running the Program is not restricted, ...
>>
>> The license does not cover running of the program. It doesn't restrict
>> it, but it doesn't cover it. Claiming otherwise is turning the GPL into
>> yet another dreaded EULA.
> For many juridisctions loading from disk into memory is copying and in
> some from memory to CPU cache a second copy. This is one reason as I
> understand it GPLv3 talks about "conveying" - to avoid that mess and
> confusion.
Hmm... This is interesting. Let me sidetrack a little bit.
Who would be held liable should the copy not be authorized by the
copyright holder? The designer of the hardware? The seller? The
person who powerer the computer on? The author of the boot loader (if
I'm talking about the kernel about to be loaded).
> Really irrelevant to the discussion. Tivo's firmware is up to them.
> Whether the resulting system permits them to include GPLv2 software with
> it is what matters.
+1
It all boils down to whether they're keeping their promise to not
impose further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted in
the license.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
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]
