Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Sep 2006 15:36 UTC, submitted by Moulinneuf
Thread beginning with comment 166497
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-24
DrillSgt wrote:
-"By placing restrictions on how the software can be used. believe it or not, that is taking away the freedom of it."
GPL is a licence, it already contains restrictions, so by your terms it can't be "freedom". the licence protects a number of end-user rights. some of these rights are being circumvented by the use of restrictive DRM. hence a new version of the GPL is being drafted.
you can argue that restrictive DRM is a "freedom" if you so wish, but it's still incompatible with the base provisions on which GPL is built.