From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1IBA0q-00037H-Pa for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:56:21 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6IDsb7x030472; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:54:37 GMT Received: from mra03.ch.as12513.net (mra03.ch.as12513.net [82.153.254.71]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l6IDmba9024762 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:48:37 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mra03.ch.as12513.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0999D438C for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:46:14 +0100 (BST) Received: from mra03.ch.as12513.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mra03.ch.as12513.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 17845-01-59 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:46:11 +0100 (BST) Received: from compaq.stroller.uk.eu.org (213-152-39-90.dsl.eclipse.net.uk [213.152.39.90]) by mra03.ch.as12513.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7483DD432E for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:46:10 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.10.191] (unknown [192.168.1.200]) by compaq.stroller.uk.eu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10AF513780D for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:48:29 +0100 (BST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: <14178ED3A898524FB036966D696494FB138F1E@messenger.cv63.navy.mil> References: <14178ED3A898524FB036966D696494FB138F1E@messenger.cv63.navy.mil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Stroller Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:48:28 +0100 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-Virus-Scanned: by Eclipse VIRUSshield at eclipse.net.uk X-Archives-Salt: 7c6b0f18-d09b-4e41-89df-55f6af693582 X-Archives-Hash: 564cbaf25929d8c02488cacb86692663 On 17 Jul 2007, at 18:38, 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