On 3/14/06, Larry Brown <larry.brown@dimensionnetworks.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 10:55, Levi Bard wrote:
>
> > No. What it means is that M$ and that group of companies have to
> > write their encrypted spyware from scratch and not use any GPLv3 code
> > to help them write it more quickly and make it more stable. It
> > doesn't mean anything about what software can be installed on what
> > hardware.
> >
>
> If GPLv3 code requires that the user be able to upgrade / modify ( or
> view the source of ) software resident on the hardware wouldn't that
> qualify? If I spoke Legalese I'd go read the GPLv3 and understand how
> they draw the line. However, I don't and am relying on some astute
> colleagues to help me understand the extent of what they are trying to
> do here.
Well, I am now a lawyer. But GPL only requires those things if you're
the one distributing the software. You can install GPL software onto
anything you want, anytime you want. However, if you want to *sell*
or otherwise *distribute* your magic box powered by GNU/Linux (or
whatever), your users had better be able to get the source, modify the
source, and run their modifications.
-- 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 - 19:57:07 EDT