Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

From: David Greaves
Date: Fri Jun 15 2007 - 14:11:34 EST

Linus Torvalds wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, David Greaves wrote:
Surely it's more:
bad == go away and don't use future improvements to our software anymore

Well, with the understanding that I don't think that what Tivo did was bad in the first place, let me tackle that question *anyway*.

The answer is: Not necessarily.
I do agree with what you say here. Maybe a summary:
Babies, bathwater...
When you have a hammer (license) everything looks like a nail...

See? You don't actually have to like Tivo to see downsides to trying to stop them. Because these kinds of things have consequences *outside* of just stopping Tivo.

My concern is around embedded type systems and maybe even the 'trusted' frameworks etc.

I _think_ I can see a completely opensource system that the end user cannot modify _in any way_. Which kinda defeats the point (to me) of opensource.

This 5 minute design undoubtedly has flaws but it shows a direction:
A basically standard 'De11' PC with some flash.
A Tivoised boot system so only signed kernels boot.
A modified kernel that only runs (FOSS) executables whose signed hash lives in the flash.

Do we (you) _want_ to prevent this?

Do we trust in 'the market' to prevent this?

Do we use license tools?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at