Linus and the whole DRM discussion
schiessle
|
Sunday 12 March 2006
|
I have read Marcus and Shanes article about DRM and the interview of Linus Torvalds.
I don't know the motivation of Linus, but i have read many interviews since the first draft of GPLv3 and for my understanding he repeats the same mistake again and again. He compares DRM with protecting your personal data. But that's not why DRM was developed and it's not developed to protect the connection between your fridge and your laptop like shane tries to describe. For all this tasks we already have really good encryption algorithm and programs which we use every day like GnuPG, ssh, vpn etc. and all this programs have the advantage that you have always the full control over your data.
Therefore nobody needs DRM. DRM is only useful if someone wants to control how you can use some data on your PC. DRM is designed that someone else have control over your data and your PC and not for you to protect your diary or your fridge<->laptop connection.
Linus shark example is interesting too:
"Just to explain the fundamental issue: To me, the GPL really boils down to "I give out code, I want you to do the same." The thing that makes me not want to use the GPLv3 in its current form is that it really tries to move more toward the "software freedom" goals. For example, the GPLv2 in no way limits your use of the software. If you're a mad scientist, you can use GPLv2'd software for your evil plans to take over the world ("Sharks with lasers on their heads!!"), and the GPLv2 just says that you have to give source code back. And that's OK by me. I like sharks with lasers. I just want the mad scientists of the world to pay me back in kind. I made source code available to them, they have to make their changes to it available to me. After that, they can fry me with their shark-mounted lasers all they want."
Linus said he doesn't like the GPLv3 because she will "move more toward the software freedom goals". Have i missed something? The goal of the GPL as the No.1 license of the FSF was always software freedom. If Linus notices this only now, i really wonder at his license choice for Linux.
But let's go back to the "laser sharks". Let's assume that a company A takes the GPLv2 code written by Linus and uses the code for their AI-shark. Later they sell their shark to person B and uses DRM so that only the code from company A will run on the shark. Now person B would like to build the "laser shark", after they have prepared the shark with a laser and altered the code they realize that their code won't run on the shark.
What happens? Linus just want that everyone can do with his code what he wants but obviously person B can't build Linus beloved "laser shark". Now the DRM clause of GPLv3 would be exactly what Linus would need to secure that everyone can do with his code whatever he wants.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are permitted worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
