On Jun 14, 2007, "Chris Friesen" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[email protected]> 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
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?
--
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]
