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

[David Greaves <david@dgreaves.com>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, David Greaves wrote:
> > Surely it's more:
> >   bad == go away and don't use future improvements to our software anymore
> > please.
> > ??
>
> Well, with the understanding that I don't think that what Tivo did was bad 
> in the first place, let me tackle that question *anyway*.
>
> The answer is: Not necessarily.
I do agree with what you say here. Maybe a summary:
Babies, bathwater...
When you have a hammer (license) everything looks like a nail...

> See? You don't actually have to like Tivo to see downsides to trying to 
> stop them. Because these kinds of things have consequences *outside* of 
> just stopping Tivo.

My concern is around embedded type systems and maybe even the 'trusted' 
frameworks etc.

I _think_ I can see a completely opensource system that the end user cannot 
modify _in any way_. Which kinda defeats the point (to me) of opensource.

This 5 minute design undoubtedly has flaws but it shows a direction:
A basically standard 'De11' PC with some flash.
A Tivoised boot system so only signed kernels boot.
A modified kernel that only runs (FOSS) executables whose signed hash lives in 
the flash.

Do we (you) _want_ to prevent this?

Do we trust in 'the market' to prevent this?

Do we use license tools?

David

-
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/