Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

[Jeff Garzik]

Neil Brown wrote:
> But maybe I am just misinformed.  Maybe there are dozens of different
> manufacturers making devices that use DRM to prohibit freedom despite
> using GPL code, and maybe there are hundreds of submarine patents
> owned by distributors of GPL code and embodied in that code that the
> owners are going to start suing us overs.... Is there a list of these
> somewhere?

At least for patents, lawyers scream bloody murder if a list of patents 
is posted.  Once that is done, people can no longer claim ignorance of a 
patent.


> > What is the stance of the developer team / kernel maintainers on DRM,
>
> While I cannot speak for other developers (and sometimes have trouble
> speaking for myself), one stance I have often heard is that DRM is
> simply a tool - one that is largely based on cryptography which is
> just another tool.  They can have good uses and bad uses just like the
> TCP/IP stack (think 'spam').  So code to implement then would (if of
> suitable quality) be allowed into the kernel.  If you want to make DRM
> illegal, speak to your member-of-parliament, not your code developers.

This is a KEY POINT: There can be good DRM as well as bad DRM.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/