Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Feb 2006 21:15 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source Linus Torvalds, father of the Linux kernel, has fleshed out his unhappiness with GPLv3 in three recent posts on the Linux Kernel Mailing List. Torvalds previously stated that the kernel will remain under the licensing terms of GPLv2. Yesterday, Torvalds offered his opinion as to where the battle over DRM should take place.
Thread beginning with comment 92280
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
What a nightmare
by moleskine on Fri 3rd Feb 2006 00:44 UTC
Member since:

The GPLv3 is a disaster in public relations terms because it gives the impression that copyright = bad and freedom to do what you like with other people's work = good. If that's what you think, then fine; but also accept that the overwhelming majority of folks do not agree. They may not like Hollywood gouging and Sony rootkits, but they do understand that if you write a book, say, you are entitled to enjoy at least some exclusive copyright in it and on that basis make some money. This is not an argument that will be won on technical grounds but on simple ideas that non-technical people can understand.

Outside of the F/oss movement the good/bad black and white approach isn't going to fly with anyone. It is a complete non-starter, as simple as that.

What LT seems to be saying is that he isn't up for playing politics and that the GPVv3's stance on DRM is too simplistic to make sense. As others have pointed out in this thread, there are several different aspects to DRM, including software, hardware and security. Lumping them all together as the devil's work, which is what the GPLv3 does, isn't a smart idea.

I've no idea where this will all end up. But if it ends up where the Stallmans of the world would like, then a lot of folks on this board who currently use Linux will be using a Mac in 18 months. You can fight outdated business models and you can fight lousy corporations but don't waste time fighting DRM itself because not all of it is bad.

And reflect that the FSF's approach is just as authoritarian as their opponents'. The view of both sides is "Do it our way or you cannot do it at all". No thanks.

Reply Score: 5

RE: What a nightmare
by ma_d on Fri 3rd Feb 2006 05:50 in reply to "What a nightmare"
ma_d Member since:

That was what the GPL originally said. That's what it said in version 2. And that's what it's saying again in version 3.

Shoot, RMS love for free software and hate for all things proprietary comes from bad experiences with copyrights and trade secrets.

The movement likes to call itself copyleft. And you're trying to say that the GPLv3 is bad because it makes it look like they're anti-copyright?

I think one thing Linus is putting into the license that I can't find is that DRM = illegal with the GPL3. As far as I can tell it says you can't put software into the GPL if it restricts people from using their copyrighted material in legal ways...
Maybe I'm missing something or reading wrong. But saying you can't use DRM to break fair use law has nothing to do with secure hardware and digitally signed packages. Besides that, every *good* digital signature system has an override (yes, if it doesn't have one, it's not good).

Neither side says do it our way or don't. They say follow or license or don't. Which, incidentally, you can't possibly have a third state in that situation ;) .

Stallman is quite unyielding in his ideology. That, plus the rationale he provides, is a pretty good sign that he's onto something.
And I also remind you that those who disagree with him, on good grounds, usually largely agree to the point where they use his license.

Quit giving Stallman a hard time. You wouldn't have the Linux you do today without him. He's an intelligent man who deserves some respect, he's not a politician who you throw insults at because you dislike the cut of his jib!
The only people who get called idiots for believing something are the ones who actually attest to a belief. The rest should respectfully disagree until they have the guts to stand in front of 10,000 people and give their beliefs.

And no, people will not run to Mac simply because the GPL3 proves unpopular. They just won't use the GPL3. Welcome to the beauty of free software.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: What a nightmare
by halfmanhalfamazing on Fri 3rd Feb 2006 11:41 in reply to "RE: What a nightmare"
halfmanhalfamazing Member since:

----------Shoot, RMS love for free software and hate for all things proprietary comes from bad experiences with copyrights and trade secrets.-----------

His love/hate is precisely the problem.

Personally, I think alot of it is just greed on his part. Here's a guy who's software movement was started in 1983, but didn't get a whole lot of ground until linux in 1991.

Listen to the guy's words. Last year many companies came out and left their patents open for us OSS junkies to use, and here somes Stallman talking about how that isn't good enough.

Jeez man, have a little gratitude. It's not gonna hurt you.

He's not trying to compete. He's trying to ram his love/hate down everybody else's throats. That isn't the way the world works. Had he been making a better product all those years more users would've signed up.

It's all about productivity.

Reply Parent Score: 3