GPL version 3
There’s been some recent discussion about whether Linux will adopt GPL version 3, the proposed changes to the current GPL, version 2, by Stallman and the Free Software Foundation. Seems Linus isn’t on board with adopting GPLv3 for Linux. Interestingly, the controversy all stems around DRM - digital rights management. Linus makes some excellent points. I’m a little bit surprised, but I’m finding myself defending DRM to a certain degree. Or at least the right to have DRM.
The GPL, as it was conceived, was about openness. The Linux kernel is “open,” and people can modify it and do just about anything else so long as they provide the modified source code to anyone who wants it. As I say, it’s about openness and contributing back to the community.
Linus believes that open-source is truly a better model for software development. While I will reserve my judgement on that, it truly is a matter of personal (but so often corporate) preference. People should not be forced to develop open-source products. We cannot hinder commercial development though. And there is really no difference between that and DRM.
In the case of Linux, much of the issue stems around hardware vendors restricting kernels which run on their DRM-enabled hardware, which, as Linus insists, is a hardware issue, not one to be fixed via anti-DRM software licensing. If a hardware vendor wants to do this, then why should we stop them? It should be consumers who ultimately judge the decisions of commercial vendors. Not licensing.
In the spirit of openness and choice from the whole free software movement, it seems somewhat absurd to restrict these sorts of things via licensing. That’s not to say that I’m pro-DRM by any means. I just don’t feel it’s appropriate to force, via licensing, this kind of idealogy upon the world.
