On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 06:42:58AM -0500, James Blackwell wrote: > > You may not take GPLed software and use it on the Playstation because > > Sony, a third party over which you have no control, has implemented > > DRM measures in the hardware which will only run signed binaries. Even > > if you publish every scrap of information you posess under an > > unrestrictive license, you still can't do it. > > This is _almost_ true. The draft doen't say 'you can't'. The draft says > that if you do, you have to provide the tools to sign new versions. I.E. > you can't distribute gpled on DRM systems unless the opportunity for > anybody to replace it exists.
You can't do that because it's an externality. You have absolutely no means to make this happen. > > It's punishing users for an externality. That makes no sense. The > > people who are punished have no control or influence over the > > matter. Sony does not care that nobody can run GPLed software on it, > > they never wanted to anyway, so they aren't punished. > > I can see your viewpoint. I'd argue that if you can't compile new free > software for the machine, you're already locked out. "Since users are already disadvantaged, we can fuck them over further" -- Andrew Suffield
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
