Kernel developers' position on GPLv3

Yavor Doganov yavor at
Mon Sep 25 19:13:11 UTC 2006

Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
> Perhaps - for the betterment of this thread - you could point out a few
> of key things RMS and Eben said.

[not exact quotes, but very close, I believe]
Regarding DRM:
Eben Moglen: "You cannot do technologically what you're not allowed to
do legally, have a nice day!"

"If you send somebody home, give him the keys of the house!"

RMS: "GPLv3 does not forbid DRM, it is not possible to do that.  What
it does is to provide an escape from the restrictions for those who
want to escape".

"Linus Torvalds objects, with an irrational kind of stubbornness, to
one of our goals.  Namely, preventing tivoisation.  He wants people to
be able to tivoise the products that you use, and thus take away your
freedom.  This should not be surprising. Linus Torvalds never
supported the Free Software Movement."

> Which links did you follow for the transcripts?  

When, I believe, Ciaran posted them on this list, I just downloaded
them so what I have is only the link to the Bangalore speeches (since
it was easy to find it):

> Perhaps (just an idea) you could blog about the kernel developer
> concerns and point out these links?

That would be kind of useless, as nobody reads my blog.  But since the
beginning of this "dispute", back in January, I'm trying to persuade
the developers I know with relevantly good success (although much
worse than I'd like).  But in order to explain how much better GPLv3
is, I have to start from the beginning, explaining what freedom is.
The new version of the license is exactly in the *same spirit*, if
people understand that it tries to protect us from the new threats of
our freedom, which were not evident in 1991.

More information about the Discussion mailing list