>-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Schwartz >Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 4:41 PM >To: openssl-users@openssl.org >Subject: RE: Licenses... > > > >> Take for example the ActionTec DSL modem, this is sold by >ActionTec and >> runs embedded Linux. It is the standard modem Qwest sends out for DSL >> there >> are probably 100,000 or more of these in service in the Western United >> States. >> Yet you cannot obtain the modified GNU code from the ActionTec website >> as required by GPL. Oh sure, you can obtain stuff like iptables from >> ActionTec, >> or thttpd, but not the modified bootloader code or the black box >> interface itself, >> so it makes it impossible to create your own firmware, or >modify theirs, >> which >> defeats the purpose of the GPL. > > I think you misstate the purpose of the GPL. It is >pretty well understood >in the GPL camp that the GPL is not about any right to use >hardware that you >purchased however you want but that it's about the right to use >software. >Because their modified GPL'd software *is* available, others >who use that >same software can benefit from their changes. That is the purpose of the >GPL. > > The GPL is not intended to force open hardware. > > The truth is, you can create your own firmware, just not >for *their* >hardware. GPL does not infect hardware. >
That is silly, you can't create something like the ActionTec without modding the software your putting in it, to run on the hardware. When Cisco AKA Linksys did the same thing (using embedded Linux) they published what they had done with it, and there's at least 3 groups now who have come out with their own firmware versions. Operating system software doesen''t run in a vacuum - it interfaces to the hardware. If you don't publish specs on what registers do in your hardware then you are not really opening your source. Nvidia does that and that is why nobody can write a driver for their stuff even though quote-open-source-endquote drivers exist for them. According to the writings of the FSF the GPL is all about keeping software free - free to use, free to modify. There is no talk of JUST the right to "use" the software, the FSF defines use as being able to modify it as well as run it, and what ActionTec is doing is in violation of this principle, although they obviously feel they are technically within the GPL. Ted ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
