On Jun 15, 2007, "Jesper Juhl" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 15/06/07, Alexandre Oliva <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Faulty logic. The hardware doesn't *restrict* you from *MODIFYING*
>> > any fscking thing.
>> case 2'': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
>> the hardware won't let him use the result of his efforts, and gives up
> So? The user still has the source and is free to use that in other
> GPLv2 projects, that's the point.
This point of yours is a distraction from the argument in this
sub-thread.
These cases were Chris Friesen's attempt to show that GPLv2 was
tit-for-tat, and case 2'' shows it isn't, at least not in the sense he
tried to picture it:
On Jun 14, 2007, "Chris Friesen" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> 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.
--
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]
