> -Original Message-
> From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 3:00 PM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
> I totally agree here. (Of course, I think the Free Software vs.
&
On Thursday 19 July 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'RE:
[gentoo-user] 2 to 3??':
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > If you don't like the GPLv3, you probably didn't
> > *really* like t
> -Original Message-
> From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 9:42 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
> If you don't like the GPLv3, you probably didn't
> *r
> -Original Message-
> From: Stroller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:59 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> Routers:
The router issue was probably missed by a number of
people simply
On 19 Jul 2007, at 01:41, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
...
If TiVo was renting ... the devices, I would probably be on the other
side of this discussion.
Oh, absolutely. There's entirely no reason for someone to have the
right to install software on a device they don't own. But IMO on a
d
As soon as I saw this thread I knew it was trouble. I was able to
resist posting for the first couple of days - I do wish I had
maintained this restraint.
On 19 Jul 2007, at 00:48, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
if somebody buys locked hardware, it is his own freaking fault. Or
could
ANYBODY
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 06:48:38 pm Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote:
> > On 18 Jul 2007, at 18:40, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> [C]ould
> ANYBODY claim to be surprised by say Tivo?
Yes they can, since the move to DRM/TPM/etc. devices was unannounced an
On Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote:
> 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 sa
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
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Volker Armin Hemmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to
3??':
> a) nobody is forced to buy a tivo. If you don't like it, don't buy it
> and you don't have problems.
TiVo isn't forced to use GPLv3 licensed
On Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2007, at 17:19, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote:
> >> I believe that even Linus - who is noted for his long-standing
> >> opposition to v3 - would change his mind were he to experience this.
> >> "The
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Stroller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??':
> However, this is not the point.
>
> The point is that Tivo SOLD people hardware
This is the salient point for me, too. If hardware was still owned by TiVo
(in reality, n
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, "b.n." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote about 'Re:
[gentoo-user] 2 to 3??':
> What should I do, in your opinion?
Probably LGPLv3, which will allow GPLv2 (and proprietary) projects to use
it without requiring the combined work to be GPLv3.
Ac
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Alan McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??':
> On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > > The TiVo thing was completely within the word and spirit of the
> > > GPL.
> >
> >
On 18 Jul 2007, at 13:38, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
It was *barely* within the word, and definitely not within the spirit
of the GPL. Don't beleive me? Ask anyone at the FSF or RMS himself.
They wrote the thing.
...
Tivo had no option, the
On 17 Jul 2007, at 18:57, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
The preamble of Version 2 was almost unchanged from the original
preamble written for the first GPL license. It was eloquent. It
was convincing. It was awe inspiring.
...
It is hard to explain my feelings abou
On 17 Jul 2007, at 18:38, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
TiVo ... did not allow modified, and therefore potentially
Compromised, devices connect to their network.
This does not sound like theft of code, it sounds like sound network
protocol. If you wish to maintain a secure
On 17 Jul 2007, at 17:19, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote:
I believe that even Linus - who is noted for his long-standing
opposition to v3 - would change his mind were he to experience this.
"They're using the operating system _I_ wrote to lock me out of
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > The TiVo thing was completely within the word and spirit of the
> > GPL.
>
> It was *barely* within the word, and definitely not within the spirit
> of the GPL. Don't beleive me? Ask anyone at the FSF or RMS himself.
> They wrote the thi
I read a little bit of the new license, and restrictive though it may
be and also strange for a pillar of the open source community to
suddenly change is directive so drastically, I am still comforted. I
believe the essential beauty of this community is that we cannot be
governed by software lice
> -Original Message-
> From: b.n. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 6:29 PM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> Personally I'm quite happy with both GPLv2 and GPLv3.
> Frankly, my only
Personally I'm quite happy with both GPLv2 and GPLv3. Frankly, my only
real, serious concern is the fact that the two licences are incompatible.
The fact compatibility has not explicitly allowed sounds plain crazy to
me. This means that GPLv2-only projects won't exchange code anymore with
GPLv
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Edenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 4:30 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
> I'm not sure why that seems to be such a problem for GPL
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 2:27 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> More than that -- they don't allow the "compromis
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
Remember that the GPL has always been about all the users NOT just the
developers/distributors -- "adapt it to your needs" is not allowed when it
restricts other users' freedoms.
Very few GPL proponents are willing to make this (rather obviously true)
statement;
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'RE:
[gentoo-user] 2 to 3??':
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Henk Boom
> > On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann
> > <[EMAIL PRO
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'RE:
[gentoo-user] 2 to 3??':
> TiVo did not allow modified, and therefore potentially
> Compromised, devices connect to their network.
More than that -- they don't allow the "compromised" devices to boot. O
> -Original Message-
> From: Volker Armin Hemmann
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:20 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Abraham Marín Pérez wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Volker Armin Hemmann
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:19 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote:
>
> >
On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote:
> I believe that even Linus - who is noted for his long-standing
> opposition to v3 - would change his mind were he to experience this.
> "They're using the operating system _I_ wrote to lock me out of _my
> own_ router?!?!?!?"
Linus has said it several
On 17 Jul 2007, at 12:01, Graham Murray wrote:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The four freedoms:
Freedom 0: The freedom to run a program for any purpose.
Freedom 1: To study the way a program works, and adapt it to your
needs.
Freedom 2: To redistribute copies so that you can help your
neigh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
-Original Message-
From: Abraham Marín Pérez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:43 PM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
-Original Message-
From
> -Original Message-
> From: Abraham Marín Pérez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:43 PM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
> >
> >> -
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The four freedoms:
> Freedom 0: The freedom to run a program for any purpose.
> Freedom 1: To study the way a program works, and adapt it to your needs.
> Freedom 2: To redistribute copies so that you can help your neighbors.
> Freedom 3: Improve the program, and rele
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Henk Boom
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:08 AM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann
<[EMAIL PROTEC
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Henk Boom
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:08 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann
On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
because gplv3 removes freedom?
As far as I remember from when I read it, it does not take any
freedoms which the previous versions did not intend to. The purpose of
the GPL is to protect the 4 freedoms. This instalment just closes
loo
On Monday 16 July 2007, Volker Armin Hemmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to
3??':
> On Montag, 16. Juli 2007, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > On Monday 16 July 2007 08:15:43 am Mark Shields wrote:
> > Personally... reading what I have ab
On Montag, 16. Juli 2007, Jerry McBride wrote:
> On Monday 16 July 2007 08:15:43 am Mark Shields wrote:
>
>
> Personally... reading what I have about the gpl 3.0 , I'd be pretty
> comfortable having Gentoo/Portage moved to it.
>
> It offers a lot of protection that gpl 2. does not.
>
> Anyway, if i
On Montag, 16. Juli 2007, Mark Shields wrote:
> On 7/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Jerry McBride [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 7:11 AM
> > > To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> > > Subject: [gentoo-use
On Monday 16 July 2007 08:15:43 am Mark Shields wrote:
Personally... reading what I have about the gpl 3.0 , I'd be pretty
comfortable having Gentoo/Portage moved to it.
It offers a lot of protection that gpl 2. does not.
Anyway, if it makes Microsoft "catch up" then it must be good.
--
On 7/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry McBride [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 7:11 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
> Anyone aware of any plans for Gentoo/Portage movi
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry McBride [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 7:11 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
> Anyone aware of any plans for Gentoo/Portage moving to the
> gpl3.0 license?
I haven't heard anything, but
On Saturday 14 July 2007 00:11:27 Jerry McBride wrote:
> Anyone aware of any plans for Gentoo/Portage moving to the gpl3.0 license?
There's been some discussion of it in the subthread titled: "Watch out for
license changes to GPL-3" on the gentoo-dev mailing list (it's pretty
boring). The answer
44 matches
Mail list logo
