[clue-tech] The Great GPL v3 Debate Thread

[David L. Anselmi]

Jed S. Baer wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:59:55 -0700
> David L. Anselmi wrote:
> 
>>Debian seems to consider anti-DRM language (like the GFDL has) to be 
>>non-free.  That seems reasonable to me--it restricts what users can do 
>>with the software.
> 
> Marcus' TiVo example is a good one. Being able to tinker with the software
> isn't very useful if you then can't use your modifications.

See http://news.com.com/Defender+of+the+GPL/2008-1082_3-6028495.html

Well, I don't know.  Seems to me you can do all you want with the code, 
just not the box.  You can use the code on other boxes.  Maybe you can't 
use the other boxes with the TiVo service but so what.

The thing is that ideas are not property, they are a commons.  Likewise, 
expressions of ideas are a commons.  The commons should be free. 
American tradition accepts restrictions on the commons that the founding 
fathers thought were beneficial (and are increasing lately).

Stallman doesn't care that you can't modify the code to get movies out 
for your friends.  That would violate the same law the GPL is founded 
on.  His complaint is that you can't modify the code to spoof your 
viewing habits (or whatever) reported to TiVo.  I think that in 
providing their service TiVo can ask whatever they want of you and if 
you agree so be it (as long as you know what you're agreeing to, of course).

So he seems to be straying from "the commons should be free" to "you 
can't use the commons to be mean to people".  And that isn't the purview 
of the GPL IMO.  (Granted of course that I may completely misunderstand 
what the FSF is trying to do.)

Dave
_______________________________________________
CLUE-tech mailing list
CLUE-tech at cluedenver.org
http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech