[ILUG] Novell A Linux Leader? GPL 3 and

[Colm MacCarthaigh]

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 10:51:23AM +0000, Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
> Colm MacCarthaigh <colm at stdlib.net> writes:
> > If all desktop computer hardware contains DRM, then by implication there
> > would be zero market for DRM-free hardware, so there would be no problem -
> > since noone would care.
> 
> Not true.  There are only a handful of companies can that manufacture whole
> desktop PCs at reasonable prices.  An agreement could be reached between
> them to only sell hardware with non-user-controlled-DRM.  This can happen
> whether anyone cares or not.

No, it really can't, they arn't that stupid. But even if this did
happen, so what? What the hell difference do you think GPLv3 would make
exactly? Do you think such a dystopian hardware alliance would even
care? 

Wouldn't the GPLv3 in fact *discourage* them from distributing Free
software? After all, all that expensive DRM would become meaningless if
they have to give you the key.

What do you think the GPLv3 would actually achieve, apart from appeasing
the grandstanding moralistic egos of various zealouts?

> > > You're suggesting is that software licences should stand back and rely on a
> > > plan that is guaranteed to fail.
> > 
> > How is it guaranteed to fail? Would the source code suddenly become
> > unusable? Would I suddenly become unable to run that code elsewhere?
> 
> I explained this.  There would be no "elsewhere".

O.k., lets imagine all current hardware and all non-DRM hardware somehow
suddenly stopped existing, and lets further imagine that there really
way zero way to defeat the DRM, or zero way to install unsigned software
(incredibly unlikely). 

How would this still not be a hardware consumer issue? And how would the
GPLv3 actually help in the slightest?

The GPLv3 offers no protection against the scenario you outline, none.
It might induce a warm fuzzy high-moral-ground feeling of not having
been "part of the problem" but it won't have actually done anything.

No, the GPLv3 clause is only practicable at the level punishing people
like Tivo, because the FSF thinks they're evil. And further to this,
it's only effective when there *is* competition. All it will achieve is
to reduce the usage and availability of Free software. 

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp at stdlib.net