article on GPLv3, Linux kernel, and Devices Rigged to Malfunction

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra rms at
Wed Oct 25 13:31:22 UTC 2006

Ter, 2006-10-24 às 10:25 +0100, Alex Hudson escreveu:
> On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 09:43 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > > > The authorisation code the GPL refers to is a shared secret key;
> > > > publicising that would make the entire reason of having it moot and
> > > > pointless,
> > 
> > Yes Alex. And that is a feature. What is wrong is that the USERS of said
> You totally miss the point, which was in the text you snipped.
> The point isn't that the GPLv3 would knock out such systems; it's that
> no-one in their right mind (afaik) would design a shared secret system
> in the knowledge that they would be sharing the secret.

Those "in their right mind" (if you could call it so) wouldn't be
exploiting us this way, and would have a harder path to do so.

With the GNU GPL v3 it would be a copyright license violation to
distribute unmodifiable GPL'ed software, so they would really have to
change their strategies...

I'm almost willing to bet even Theo de Raddt would feel quite raving mad
at such an use of OpenBSD...

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Esta é uma parte de mensagem	assinada digitalmente
URL: <>

More information about the Discussion mailing list