[Discuss] Fwd: Hey FCC, Don't Lock Down Our Wi-Fi Routers | WIRED

[mark at buttery.org (Shirley Márquez Dúlcey)]

I think your interpretation of the TiVo situation is philosophically
incorrect, even though there are no factual errors. The original
intent of the GPL was to protect the freedom to use GPL software in
any way you see fit, including the use of modified versions and
sharing those modified versions with others if you wish. The TiVo
people found a loophole that had not been envisioned when the GPLv2
was written; it allowed them to release the TiVo software as open
source while still stopping modified software from being used in the
intended manner - that is, to connect to the TiVo service.

You characterize what RMS did with the GPLv3 as "fuck TiVo". But the
reality is that TiVo had already fucked RMS by finding a way to
violate the intent of the GPL. They were compliant with the letter of
the law but not with its spirit. What RMS did with GPLv3 was close the
loophole and restore the original intent of the license. Makers of
routers don't have a similar problem; the way in which they use GPL
software is not in any way incompatible with the intent of the
license.

Whether RMS's intent is a reasonable one is a separate debate. (I
happen to believe that it is, and I suspect that Rich disagrees.) But
I think that RMS has the right to keep his work from being used in a
fundamentally closed way (as TiVo has done) if that is his wish.

Now that cloud computing and software as a service are being a normal
thing rather than an exception, the interesting question going forward
is whether we will see more adoption of the GNU Affero license. For
those unfamiliar with it, it is based on the GPLv3 but has an
additional clause that requires the publication of source code when
software is used as part of an online service such as a web site, even
if the program binary is never actually distributed to the end users.

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Rich Pieri <richard.pieri at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/7/2015 5:08 PM, Bill Bogstad wrote:
>>
>> software or FSF? lawsuits would make more sense to me.   As it is, it
>> seems to me that there must be some other reason that they don't just
>> ship something like OpenWrt.   I have my own theories involving the
>
>
> Another reason is RMS. Despite TiVo being in full compliance with the GPLv2,
> RMS took it upon himself to launch his fuck TiVo crusade. RMS and the GPLv3
> have demonstrated that using GPL software in commercial products is
> dangerous to vendors. OpenWrt includes Samba and mini-httpd, both of which
> are GPLv3. This makes OpenWrt a hot potato in the sense of a live hand
> grenade: nobody wants to be holding it when RMS goes "boom!".
>
> It isn't any one reason. When you take all of the problems that go with
> trying to use GPL software in commercial products -- warranties, support,
> licenses, RMS' sanity, and so forth -- it's easy to come to the conclusion
> that choosing free as in FSF software is the wrong choice.
>
> --
> Rich P.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss