Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Not really. GPLv3 will prevent hardware manufacturers from locking down their devices if they intend to ship Ubuntu Mobile. This is a good thing for users of those devices. I can't defend Canonical's support of proprietary drivers, especially on these devices that are known to be used for such pervasive spying, but at least a non-hardware-locked device allows for workarounds (i.e. deployment of your own free drivers).


GPLv3 will prevent hardware manufacturers from locking down their devices if they intend to ship Ubuntu Mobile.

Actually the opposite; Canonical will sell phone vendors a non-GPL version of Mir so that they can lock down their phones.


Hence the copyright assignment required for any contribution to Canonical's projects, to ease the double licensing.

But for now, it's only speculation. Time will tell.


It's not copyright assignment, it's just a broader license grant than what the GPL allows.


I'm sorry, but must be missing something. How does a GPLv3 display server prevent locking down the hardware? Afaik, the anti-TiVoization stuff only applies to the software that's GPLv3, not the stack it's running on.


Some argue that if it makes calls to a GPL application, it's a derivative work, which means it must also be GPL.

This means that if one part of the stack is GPL, everything higher must also be GPL.


Can you point me towards some people arguing this? It's patently false. If it were true, every single application on your typical GNU/Linux box would also be GPL.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: