GPLv3
Actually, a thought on this topic did pop into my head. I've been trying out (and liking) rockbox on my digital audio player:
I gather that several manufacturers claim you void your warranty if you install non-official firmware. From their perspective, a modified version could cause hardware to fail. For example, by overclocking the CPU to an unacceptable degree, or mismanaging the battery.
Let's imagine that a manufacturer decided to use rockbox as their firmware. No doubt the release they use with their device will have undergone some degree of code auditing and testing. So should they be obliged to cover me if I've make changes to their "official" release of the firmware?
Now for good reason (Freedom 1), GPLv3 (as I understand it) is meant to stop manufacturers from signing Free Software binaries in such a way that users can't run modified versions. But does it (and should it) also prevent them from determining whether a device has had modified firmware installed on it?
Hmmm...
Malcolm.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com