Re: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders

[Karim Yaghmour]

Thomas Horsten wrote:
> 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.

As a software license, GPLv3 can dictate the usage rules for software
distributed under it, but it can't dictate the usage terms of hardware
and software independently developed (ex.: DRM'ed hardware and
proprietary user-space applications). No wording could erase that.
And what is suggest is not "circumvention", it's just not something
GPLv3 could cover.

> 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.

DRM is a symptom, not the root problem. The root problem is that someone
somewhere has been convinced that they are loosing money because of
"pirates". Sure, middle-men (record labels) have crafted the reality to
fit their needs. But the latter would not be able to operate would the
former not exist. There's only one thing "artists" will dislike more than
the fear of not making money: it's actually not making any. So if you
want to get rid of DRM, the solution is to not buy any DRM'ed stuff.
Every time you buy a region-coded DVD or a "protected" CD you are
feeding the DRM cycle. To stop it, just don't buy any of it.

Karim
-- 
President  / Opersys Inc.
Embedded Linux Training and Expertise
www.opersys.com  /  1.866.677.4546
-
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/