Slashdot Mirror
TiVo Says It Could Suffer Under GPLv3
Preedit writes to tell us that those busy folks over at InformationWeek have been scrutinizing yet more SEC filings, and Novell and Microsoft aren't the only ones concerned about certain provisions in the final draft of GPLv3. TiVo worries too. The problem is that TiVo boxes are Linux-based. They're also designed to shut down if the software is hacked by users trying to circumvent DRM features. But GPLv3 would prohibit TiVo's no-tamper setup. "If the currently proposed version of GPLv3 is widely adopted, we may be unable to incorporate future enhancements to the GNU/Linux operating system into our software, which could adversely affect our business," TiVo warns in a regulatory filing cited by InformationWeek."
Whatever happens with everything else, I thought Linus said Linux wouldn't be distributed under GPLv3
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Or they could switch to BSD or some other system under another license. Isn't open source great?
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
TiVo operates on a business model that GPL3 is **expressly** designed to eliminate.
See this essay by RMS and search for "tivoization".
Nothing in the least bit surprising here...
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
I don't follow how BSD will be affected by GPLv3. neither NetBSD, FreeBSD, and OpenBSD use the GNU C library. code generated by gcc isn't covered under the GPL.
NetBSD: the cathedral vs the bizzare.
The BSD projects still use gcc and GNU C library
The BSDs most certainly do not use the GNU libc. While it is true that you cannot compile the system without gcc, you can definitely have a running BSD system with no GNU tools installed. It would be fairly bare bones (back to csh), but it's possible.
Here's a link to the OpenBSD libc for your browsing pleasure.
FYI, glibc is under the LGPL.
"In my day to day work I avoid using any software that is GPLed because of commercial concerns (out side of my control) I cannot release details of software. So I have to reinvent everything and the open source community loses out on anything beneficial I may have done. A lose lose situation."
A lose-lose situation? How? If you aren't planning on giving derivative work back to the free software community in exchange for the free use of their software, they don't benefit.
Seems to me that (just like Tivo's) your dislike for the GPL comes only because you don't really want give back where you take.
Well, glibc is not under GPLv2, so it seems unlikely to go GPLv3. It is under LGPL.
Way to shaft all the people who bet their business on your software, bub, by changing the license terms. And the /. crowd complain about Microsoft licensing practices.
Existing software is all GPL version 2. That doesn't change. All they bellyache over is that new software, released under version 3, may not be useable by them. No license is being changed from under their feet.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
I think it will be more like this: Circumventing the copy protection will still be illegal, but by using DRM the company is breaching the license agreement for the code. Thus, they must either scrap the DRM or else stop using GPL'd code.
I am not willing because it can infect software that I do not have the rights to.
GPL code doesn't "infect" anything. It's an invitation to enter into a contract, which you are free to accept or refuse. If you don't have the rights necessary to enter into said contract, that's not the licensor's problem. Like everyone says: "don't like the GPL? write your own goddam code and stop whining".
What would Lemmy do?
Hey Mr... the Lesser GPL is also being revised, and you know what? It's basically GPLv3 with Exceptions A B and C :)
The big stink would essentially KILL Linux in many organizations.
This statement is wrong in so many fundamental ways it displays a total lack of knowledge regarding Tivo's hostility to the GPL.
What the Tivo people did was privatize Free (as in speech) software. It is roughly analogous to stealing a painting from a publicly-funded museum and hanging it up in your house. They accomplished this a number of ways including a signature check of some kind during startup. The implications are:
1. Source code is _useless_ now
2. Source code is no longer Free.
3. Source code cannot be modified.
This is a novel approach that disables numerous fundamental intents of the GPL and captures, for Tivo's sole benefit, the countless man hours that have gone into building Linux-based operating sytems.
Furthermore, businesses that will not like Linux under GPL v3 or think the spirit of the GPL doesn't apply to them (Tivo, that's you) should be using BSD.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html