On 18 Jul 2007, at 18:40, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
...
Linus has said it several times that he was ok with the thing Tivo
did.
And Tivo is the reason for that clause in GPLv3.
I've seen no evidence that he said this AFTER spending a big chunk of
his own money on hardware, plugging it into his ethernet network and
finding himself frustrated by an inability to copy shows recorded in
his living room to the Tivo in his den.
a) nobody is forced to buy a tivo. If you don't like it, don't buy
it and you
don't have problems.
b) AFAIR Linus owns a Tivo himself.
c) it is morally wrong to try to dictate HARDWARE licence problems
with a
SOFTWARE licence
I'm always amazed at how the internet enables folks to _reply to_
discussion points without actually _answering_ them. But I gather
that repeating a point three times is nearly as effective as three
people in agreement each making that point once, so maybe that is
your intent?
a) You ignore all the comments in other posts about the ethical
aspects of selling locked hardware:
- end-user's ownership of the hardware they purchase; is the locking
made clear at time of purchase?
- anti-competitive practices.
- environmental damage when obsolete locked hardware cannot be re-
purposed. It must be disposed of in landfill, lead solder, mercury &
whatnot leaking dramatically into the water table because the
firmware cannot be upgraded to one that actually works.
These matters are our concern whether or not we personally buy
Product_X. Only if you have never made a casual or uninformed
purchase, have never found that a product you have bought does not
work _quite_ as advertised will you be unable to appreciate these
points. As Mr Boyd Smith Jr. points out so eloquently, it is not our
responsibility to support Vendor_X's business model - if I find open-
source code running on a device I have purchased I have a reasonable
expectation that I should be able to modify that code (as the author
intended) and run that on the same hardware I own. Hopefully new
European legislation requiring manufacturers to be responsible for
disposing of hardware they have sold will have some knock-on effects
on hardware locking, but it's hardly a direct way of dealing with the
problem.
b) I never said Linus didn't own a Tivo himself.
What I said was that he might see things differently were
"Tivotisation" to _cost him personally_ time, inconvenience,
frustration and expense.
I can't determine in what circumstances this might actually occur,
but I know I'd be shouting blue murder to the rafters if I wrote
thousands of lines of code, gave them away for free for anyone to use
and then some bugger sold that software back to me and prevented me
from changing it when I needed to.
The active part of the last sentence is "when needed" - we can
discuss this forever on the internets, it's all nice and arty & farty
to talk about morals & philosophies of freedom & software licensing
but I challenge anyone not to feel offended when those ideals have
kicked you in the teeth.
c) WTF!?!?!? Can you justify this statement?
Stroller.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
