* 7 peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Samba author: GPLv3 has further to go
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | "Some people complain a lot about the anti-DRM provisions, and I would
>> | have liked to see those actually be even stronger than they are. Because
>> | currently they've got some limitations in there that limits some of the
>> | anti-DRM provisions of GPLv3 to only being applicable to consumer
>> | products. Which means it leaves out, for example, some Samba appliances.
>> |
>> | "I'd like to see a future version of the GPL perhaps going a little bit
>> | stronger than that and applying it to the non-consumer/enterprise
>> | appliances as well" said Tridgell.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa
>
> I think the key here is not to mix up GPL and anti-drm.
> A separate anti-drm license extension should be produced for certain
> projects that are key to targeting drm related violators
> of free software. It would only apply to certain key
> projects like codecs for example so that free software
> developers can use them on projects with higher than usual risks
> of violators being attracted to it like a magnet.
Sounds like a good idea to me, 7.
--
Technology is just a tool. In terms of getting the kids working together and
motivating them, the teacher is the most important.
-- Bill Gates
|
|
