Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

["Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss03@volumehost.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2634 bytes --]

On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Alan McKinnon <alan@linuxholdings.co.za> wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??':
> On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > > The TiVo thing was completely within the word and spirit of the
> > > GPL.
> >
> > It was *barely* within the word, and definitely not within the spirit
> > of the GPL.  Don't beleive me?  Ask anyone at the FSF or RMS himself.
> >  They wrote the thing.
>
> TiVo did just that and got the A-OK signal and thumbs up from the FSF's
> lawyers.

That's because you *could* swap out the software on early TiVos.

> Sometime later, someone had a hissy fit, FSF reversed their 
> stated position and suddenly Tivo becomes spawn of satan.

Because they started artificially limiting users' freedoms 0, 1, and 
partially 3.

> Tivo had no option, their content providers would never have given them
> a license to redistribute content without the mods they did

It's not my (or my community's, or my code's) job to support your business 
model.  If you can't play by the license, then you can't use the software.

> It's not the software that is crippled, it's the hardware.

No, it's the software because they haven't given it all to us.  For 
software to run on the device it was *designed* to run on it's required to 
be signed; therefore, the signature is part of the binary and a derivative 
of a GPLv2 work.  That work distributed presumably under the GPLv2, which 
means the source ("preferred format for making modifications") must be 
provided, and TiVo has not yet published the necessary tools for us to 
generate our own signatures.

They are therefore limiting freedom 1, which limits freedom 0, and 
indirectly freedom 3, because the community cannot benefit.

> So, in what way have Tivo removed people's freedom as
> granted by the GPL?

Artificially limiting freedoms 0, 1, and 3.  The restriction is 
fundamentally different from a RAM or HD space limit; a binary that does 
nothing but play pong (well within the hardware capabilities of the TiVo) 
is still not allowed to run without the signature.

Personally, I think TiVo COULD be called out for violating GPLv2, but IANAL 
and Eben is and declined to file suit against them.  Under the GPLv3, 
users' freedoms are better protected, and it's quite clear that TiVo 
would/will be in violation of that license.

-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                     ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03@volumehost.net                      ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy           `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/                      \_/     

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]