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

[Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk>]

On 17 Jul 2007, at 18:38, <burlingk@cv63.navy.mil>  
<burlingk@cv63.navy.mil> wrote:
>
> TiVo ... did not allow modified, and therefore potentially
> Compromised, devices connect to their network.
>
> This does not sound like theft of code, it sounds like sound network
> protocol.  If you wish to maintain a secure environment that is stable
> for thousands of users, and has a lot of money riding on it, you do
> not allow compromised devices to connect.

I'm not familiar with Tivo's "network" - I'd had the impression that  
a Tivo merely dialled into their servers & obtained a TV schedule.

However, this is not the point.

The point is that Tivo SOLD people hardware which was locked in such  
a way that it made restrictions upon the purchasers' use of that  
hardware. I presume that - although the GPL requires Tivo to inform  
purchasers of their rights to a copy of the source code - this  
retriction was not advertised at the point-of-sale.

There are lots of valid uses for a low-power computer with a TV-tuner  
card, a hard-drive and a good TV-compatible video-output aside from  
"hacking" Tivo's network.

If you want to build a secure network I think it's behoven upon you  
to bear the cost of that. I just find it the idea objectionable that  
you should be able to take source code that other people have written  
- that other people have released publicly with the intent that it  
should benefit all - and use that in a way detrimental to the  
majority of users.

To bear the cost of a "secure environment" feel free to rent out the  
equipment. Require a minimum 12-month contract, if you wish, but do  
not "sell" the customer equipment which locks them into your service,  
equipment which they "own" but which is worthless scrap should they  
choose to cancel their subscription with you. That, IMO, is  
misleading and whilst vendors may be entitled to sell equipment which  
is locked to their service, I feel they ought to have the good grace  
to write their own damn code if they're going to do so. Nintendo do  
this quite successfully with their PS3 & Xbox360 consoles, and do not  
rely on the open-source community to give them a free ride.

In the Land Of The Free consumers might not need any "protection"  
from entering into any contract that they wish, but over here in  
Europe we consider this sort of behaviour as petty any anti-competitive.

> The TiVo thing was completely within the word and spirit of the GPL.
> It is sad that many zealots seem to interpret the texts otherwise.

Whilst it may have been within the _word_ of the GPL your remarks do  
not explain why the GPL has been specifically rewritten to exclude  
this behaviour. How do you reconcile this fact with your remarks that  
the Tivo thing is within the _sprit_ of the GPL?

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list