Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-19 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Thursday 19 July 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': -Original Message- From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you don't like the GPLv3, you probably didn't *really* like the GPLv2 and might be more interested in licensing

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-19 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 3:00 PM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? I totally agree here. (Of course, I think the Free Software vs. Proprietary Software war is just

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Stroller
On 17 Jul 2007, at 17:19, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote: I believe that even Linus - who is noted for his long-standing opposition to v3 - would change his mind were he to experience this. They're using the operating system _I_ wrote to lock me out of

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Stroller
On 17 Jul 2007, at 18:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TiVo ... did not allow modified, and therefore potentially Compromised, devices connect to their network. This does not sound like theft of code, it sounds like sound network protocol. If you wish to maintain a secure

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Stroller
On 17 Jul 2007, at 18:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... The preamble of Version 2 was almost unchanged from the original preamble written for the first GPL license. It was eloquent. It was convincing. It was awe inspiring. ... It is hard to explain my feelings about

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Stroller
On 18 Jul 2007, at 13:38, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: It was *barely* within the word, and definitely not within the spirit of the GPL. Don't beleive me? Ask anyone at the FSF or RMS himself. They wrote the thing. ... Tivo had no option,

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: The TiVo thing was completely within the word and spirit of the GPL. It was *barely* within the word, and definitely not within

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': What should I do, in your opinion? Probably LGPLv3, which will allow GPLv2 (and proprietary) projects to use it without requiring the combined work to be GPLv3. Actually, I'm probably going to take

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Stroller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': However, this is not the point. The point is that Tivo SOLD people hardware This is the salient point for me, too. If hardware was still owned by TiVo (in reality, not just in name) I'd have

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
On Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote: On 17 Jul 2007, at 17:19, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote: I believe that even Linus - who is noted for his long-standing opposition to v3 - would change his mind were he to experience this. They're using

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': a) nobody is forced to buy a tivo. If you don't like it, don't buy it and you don't have problems. TiVo isn't forced to use GPLv3 licensed code -- if they don't use it, they don't have

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Stroller
On 18 Jul 2007, at 18:40, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: ... Linus has said it several times that he was ok with the thing Tivo did. And Tivo is the reason for that clause in GPLv3. I've seen no evidence that he said this AFTER spending a big chunk of his own money on hardware, plugging it into

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
On Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote: On 18 Jul 2007, at 18:40, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: ... Linus has said it several times that he was ok with the thing Tivo did. And Tivo is the reason for that clause in GPLv3. I've seen no evidence that he said this AFTER spending a

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 06:48:38 pm Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Donnerstag, 19. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote: On 18 Jul 2007, at 18:40, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: [C]ould ANYBODY claim to be surprised by say Tivo? Yes they can, since the move to DRM/TPM/etc. devices was unannounced and a

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Stroller
As soon as I saw this thread I knew it was trouble. I was able to resist posting for the first couple of days - I do wish I had maintained this restraint. On 19 Jul 2007, at 00:48, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: if somebody buys locked hardware, it is his own freaking fault. Or could

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Stroller
On 19 Jul 2007, at 01:41, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: ... If TiVo was renting ... the devices, I would probably be on the other side of this discussion. Oh, absolutely. There's entirely no reason for someone to have the right to install software on a device they don't own. But IMO on a

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Stroller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:59 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? Routers: The router issue was probably missed by a number of people simply because in the states

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 9:42 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? If you don't like the GPLv3, you probably didn't *really* like the GPLv2 and might be more

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread b.n.
Personally I'm quite happy with both GPLv2 and GPLv3. Frankly, my only real, serious concern is the fact that the two licences are incompatible. The fact compatibility has not explicitly allowed sounds plain crazy to me. This means that GPLv2-only projects won't exchange code anymore with

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: b.n. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 6:29 PM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? Personally I'm quite happy with both GPLv2 and GPLv3. Frankly, my only real, serious concern is the fact

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Dan Cowsill
I read a little bit of the new license, and restrictive though it may be and also strange for a pillar of the open source community to suddenly change is directive so drastically, I am still comforted. I believe the essential beauty of this community is that we cannot be governed by software

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-18 Thread Alan McKinnon
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: The TiVo thing was completely within the word and spirit of the GPL. It was *barely* within the word, and definitely not within the spirit of the GPL.  Don't beleive me?  Ask anyone at the FSF or RMS himself.  They wrote the thing.

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henk Boom Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:08 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: because gplv3

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Abraham Marín Pérez
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henk Boom Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:08 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Graham Murray
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The four freedoms: Freedom 0: The freedom to run a program for any purpose. Freedom 1: To study the way a program works, and adapt it to your needs. Freedom 2: To redistribute copies so that you can help your neighbors. Freedom 3: Improve the program, and release

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Abraham Marín Pérez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:43 PM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Abraham Marín Pérez
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: -Original Message- From: Abraham Marín Pérez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:43 PM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: -Original Message- From

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Stroller
On 17 Jul 2007, at 12:01, Graham Murray wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The four freedoms: Freedom 0: The freedom to run a program for any purpose. Freedom 1: To study the way a program works, and adapt it to your needs. Freedom 2: To redistribute copies so that you can help your

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote: I believe that even Linus - who is noted for his long-standing opposition to v3 - would change his mind were he to experience this. They're using the operating system _I_ wrote to lock me out of _my own_ router?!?!?!? Linus has said it several

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Volker Armin Hemmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:19 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Stroller wrote: I believe that even Linus - who is noted

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Volker Armin Hemmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:20 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? On Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007, Abraham Marín Pérez wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': TiVo did not allow modified, and therefore potentially Compromised, devices connect to their network. More than that -- they don't allow the compromised devices to boot. Of course, that's *required* to lay

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henk Boom On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: because gplv3 removes freedom

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread Mike Edenfield
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: Remember that the GPL has always been about all the users NOT just the developers/distributors -- adapt it to your needs is not allowed when it restricts other users' freedoms. Very few GPL proponents are willing to make this (rather obviously true) statement;

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 2:27 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? More than that -- they don't allow the compromised devices to boot. Of course, that's

RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-17 Thread burlingk
-Original Message- From: Mike Edenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 4:30 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? I'm not sure why that seems to be such a problem for GPL proponents to admit. It's perfectly

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-16 Thread Mark Shields
On 7/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: Jerry McBride [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 7:11 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3?? Anyone aware of any plans for Gentoo/Portage moving

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-16 Thread Jerry McBride
On Monday 16 July 2007 08:15:43 am Mark Shields wrote: Personally... reading what I have about the gpl 3.0 , I'd be pretty comfortable having Gentoo/Portage moved to it. It offers a lot of protection that gpl 2. does not. Anyway, if it makes Microsoft catch up then it must be good. --

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-16 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
On Montag, 16. Juli 2007, Mark Shields wrote: On 7/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: Jerry McBride [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 7:11 AM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-16 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
On Montag, 16. Juli 2007, Jerry McBride wrote: On Monday 16 July 2007 08:15:43 am Mark Shields wrote: Personally... reading what I have about the gpl 3.0 , I'd be pretty comfortable having Gentoo/Portage moved to it. It offers a lot of protection that gpl 2. does not. Anyway, if it makes

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-16 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Monday 16 July 2007, Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??': On Montag, 16. Juli 2007, Jerry McBride wrote: On Monday 16 July 2007 08:15:43 am Mark Shields wrote: Personally... reading what I have about the gpl 3.0 , I'd be pretty comfortable

Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

2007-07-16 Thread Henk Boom
On 16/07/07, Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: because gplv3 removes freedom? As far as I remember from when I read it, it does not take any freedoms which the previous versions did not intend to. The purpose of the GPL is to protect the 4 freedoms. This instalment just closes