So, I went and read the gpl3 draft ( http://gplv3.fsf.org/draft ), and
I think a lot of people are missing the point.
> Dish Network I am sure is against GPL3 why because they use linux in there
> products. Now the thing is that in there kernel they at times have to poll
> inforomation from the firmware which is not open source as it deals with
> security. Now the thing is if you look at dish linux code you will see that
> it is very well commented out. So while ther is coded that they given back
> that says hey we are pulling a hidden hardware key it does not stop anyone
> else from creating there own firmware with ther own key. The short and the
> simple of it is that GPL3 would be anti business. Businesses at times need
> to protect key information from others. That is how businesses stay alive
> by not showing al there cards.
The draft states that "a code need not be included in cases where use
of the work normally implies the user already has it." When you
modify the source to your dish network box's code and install it on
your dish network box, you still have the firm/hardware key as part of
the box, so dish network is NOT required to divulge it as part of the
source.
The gpl3 draft doesn't say, "You're required to give up all your
business secrets to incorporate GPL software." It says, "If you're
going to port GPL software for use in your device, and distribute it
therein, you need to supply the information a user needs to modify and
run the code on that device."
So, if I buy a school of laser-sharks, and I want to modify the (GPL)
code to assign them to attack mimes on sight, I don't need the secret
hardware and firmware information from the laser shark hardware; I
just need the software I get to work once I've made my modifications
and reinstalled it.
> Now that might be a little tough to swallow for some but I personally dont
> want some dingus writing licences that is going to dictate how I use and or
> alter a piece of software. If he wants to do that I think Microsoft is
> hiring.
*Every* license dictates how you use and alter software. That's what
licenses do. If you're going to complain about the proposed gpl3 in
that respect, then you should be complaining about gpl2, gpl1, lgpl,
apache licenses, and most of the other fsf- and osdl- approved
software licenses.
-- Tcsh: Now with higher FPS! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:55:58 EDT