Changeset - a83760dcc73c
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-20 21:19:40
bkuhn@ebb.org
Rewrote this paragraph, removing much which wasn't useful.
1 file changed with 13 insertions and 20 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -2911,26 +2911,19 @@ limitation or further obligation.
 

	
 
\subsection{User Products, Installation Information and Device Lock-Down}
 

	
 
% FIXME: perhaps this additional information isn't needed, next 3 paras, but
 
%        there might be something good here
 

	
 
Another major goal for GPLv3 has been to thwart technical measures such as
 
signature checks in hardware to prevent modification of GPLed software on a
 
device.  Previous drafts attempted to accomplish this by defining
 
"Corresponding Source" to include any encryption or authorization keys
 
necessary to install new versions of the software.  A number of members of
 
the community questioned the impact and utility of such a definition.
 

	
 
The third discussion draft uses a different strategy to accomplish the same
 
task.  Section 6 requires that parties distributing object code provide
 
recipients with the source code through certain means.  Now, when those
 
distributors pass on the source, they are also required to pass on any
 
information or data necessary to install modified software on the
 
particular device that included it.  We believe that this will more
 
precisely accomplish our goals, and avoid potential problems with expanding
 
the definition of source code.  The new strategy should be familiar to free
 
software developers: the GNU LGPL has long had similar requirements that
 
enable users to link proprietary programs to modified libraries.
 
As discussed in \S~\ref{GPLv3-drm} of this tutorial, GPLv3 seeks thwart
 
technical measures such as signature checks in hardware to prevent
 
modification of GPLed software on a device.
 

	
 
To address this issue, GPLv3~\S6 requires that parties distributing object
 
code provide recipients with the source code through certain means.  When
 
those distributors pass on the CCS, they are also required to pass on any
 
information or data necessary to install modified software on the particular
 
device that included it.  (This strategy is not unlike that used in LGPLv2.1
 
to enable users to link proprietary programs to modified libraries.)
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: LGPLv2.1 section should talk about this explicitly and this
 
%              should be a forward reference here
 

	
 
\label{user-product}
 
In addition, the scope of these requirements has been narrowed.  This draft
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)