Re: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders

[Thomas Horsten]

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Karim Yaghmour wrote:

> Just to make sure there is no confusion: note that both signed and
> unsigned kernels behave identically here. It's the user-space applications
> now that fail when attempting to access some piece of hardware. The
> classic case being a mmap'ed register window, therefore both the signed
> and unsigned kernel can map it to user-space (i.e. no modification in
> behavior for the GPLv3'ed kernel), but the applications' read/writes on
> said registers don't work on the non-signed kernel.

That would be a dubious circumvention. Remember that the GPLv3 is still a
draft - the wording can (and should probably) be improved to make it clear
that the system as a whole must behave identically if a modified version
of the GPL'ed software is used.

> Like I said in the LWN forum thread, I do believe things such as DRM
> are worth fighting for, but I really think the GPL is the wrong venue.

It's a good place to start putting pressure on the OEM's. If they can
choose between heavy DRM'ed and closed hardware, and pay millions in
license fees, or get the software they need for free in return for
dropping the restrictions, some are bound to choose the free route. This
is where the fight begins.

Thomas

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/