Nothing has created furore more than the GPL version 3 which is still in the draft stage. The Free Software Foundation's move to create a separate version of GPL taking corrective measures to guard against DRM has not been well received by the core group of Linux developers which includes Linus Torvalds.
Linus's line of thought (as far as I have understood) is plainly that DRM is just a technology and it has both positive and negative uses. And it is not for FSF to take an anti-DRM stand purely based on a political aspect.
Where as, the staunch supporters of GNU have put their weight behind GPLv3 and for them it is about safeguarding ones freedom in this changing technological scenario and making sure that GPL holds relevance even in the future. Of course, I have over simplified the whole thing by stating it in such a simple manner.
The Linux kernel developers have signed a petition and cast their vote in favor of Linux retaining the current license ie GPLv2 even after when GPLv3 is finally released. They point out to three provisions in the new GPLv3 draft which is the DRM clause, the additional restrictions clause and the Patents clause for their dissatisfaction. It may be pointed out that GPLv2 has been in force for over 15 years now.
I found the following comment posted at lwn.net really thought worthy, and I quote:
How true......You can't scare big business away from Linux now. Look at the milestones made in 2.6. Look at the improvement upon system after system 2.6 has made over 2.4. No company in the right mind would desert a GPLv3 2.8 if it made only half the advances as 2.6 has.I have a sneaky suspicion (and its entirely my own feeling) that money is behind this. Linux isn't GNU/HURD. But everyone wants HURD-esqu freedom. Now we've got a HURD-like (as in free) system, in the form of Linux, we've forgotten the values. Rich with stability.I just hope no more software hijacks the GNU bandwagon, only to jump off when it becomes profitable.
No comments:
Post a Comment