Slashdot Mirror


Torvalds Explains Dislike For GPLv3

Joe Barr writes "Linus Torvalds explains in three recent posts why he doesn't care for the DRM restrictions in GPLv3, and he has never been one to hold back. From his commentary: 'I _literally_ feel that we do not - as software developers - have the moral right to enforce our rules on hardware manufacturers. We are not crusaders, trying to force people to bow to our superior God. We are trying to show others that co-operation and openness works better.' NewsForge has the complete text of all three posts available." We discussed his initial reaction to GPL3 at the end of last month. NewsForge is a sister site to Slashdot.

3 of 552 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Translation by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Informative
    Translation: "I feel that we do not have the muscle - as open source software developers - to force hardware manufactures to bow to our DRM demands. They'll just laugh at us."

    Don't put words in his mouth. Linus has never been the crusader that RMS is, and as he says in the article, doesn't want to be either. He claims that he doesn't feel like using software licensing and copyright as a weapon to fight political battles. I don't blame him, either. He seems to have meant precisely what he said. Since Linus isn't much prone to doublespeak or pulling punches, I'm tempted to believe him.

    GPL3 is a tipping point for the FSF. If they go that route, they will lose all corporate support, which they think they don't need but in fact very much do. GPL3 goes way too far. So if they want to marginalize themselves...go right ahead.

  2. Alan's Comments by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ping Wales have an interview with Alan Cox on the subject. I know of two people who have tried submitting this, but it's been rejected both times.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  3. You are wrong and out of context. by Parity · · Score: 3, Informative

    Linus understands the license correctly, as do you, but you don't understand Linus. He wasn't talking about what RedHat does -now-, he was saying -if- you had hardware that only ran signed kernels and -if- RedHat distributed a kernel for it -then- the GPLv3 -would- require RedHat to distribute their private key at the same time.

    Nothing to do with anything being done now, since RedHat does not currently run on any such locked hardware afaik.

    --
    --Parity
    'Card carrying' member of the EFF.