What if the GPL is actually a form of DRM?

What if the GPL is actually a form of DRM?

Other urls found in this thread:

vrms.alioth.debian.org/Tag:
cnet.com/au/news/bill-gates-and-other-communists/
gnu.org/philosophy/bill-gates-and-other-communists.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Well, it is isn't it ;)

DRM is a technical measure, not a legal measure. The GPL doesn't prevent you from doing anything, at most it makes things illegal. It's not DRM, just like the Windows EULA is not DRM.

The GPL does try to guarantee that you can modify whatever uses it. If you get a DRMed piece of GPLed software you're legally allowed to (and legally required to have access to the means to) remove that DRM.

That only applies to GPL3. Before GPL3, tivoization was not violation of GPL.

Not all DRM is tivoization. GPLv2 already guarded against other kinds of DRM, and the set of things it tried to guard against includes DRM in general even if it doesn't succeed in covering it fully.

Not really. The GPL3 Tivoization clause says something like: you're not allowed to convey this software if the user is not given a key to allow them to run modified versions. If the GPL software implements DRM in its software, you could always remove that DRM because you're supposed to have access to the source code.

Kek

GPL is a process running in the background to police your legitimate use of software? Or do you meant some other form of copy protection? It's actually the protection to copy in perpetuity.

This is my bastardized take on it:

Digital Rights Management

..and really what's the difference between distributing source code, that needs to be built to work and a DVD that needs libdecss to be played?

You encrypt/write your content and give away the key/autoconf to use it. You just need the right tools to decrypt/compile it or make your own compiler/tool.

The only difference is that proprietary encryption based DRM protects only the rights of the salesman and source code DRM protects both the creator and the users.

$ apt-cache show vrmsPackage: vrmsVersion: 1.17Installed-Size: 39Maintainer: Debian vrms Maintainers >Architecture: allDescription-en: virtual Richard M. Stallman The vrms program will analyze the set of currently-installed packages on a Debian-based system, and report all of the packages from the non-free and contrib trees which are currently installed. . In some cases, the opinions of Richard M. Stallman and the Debian project have diverged since this program was originally written. In such cases, this program follows the Debian Free Software Guidelines. . Note that vrms is not limited to Debian systems only (which means that it also works with Debian-derived distributions such as Ubuntu). It is also not limited to Linux-based systems. . Future versions of vrms may include an option to also display text from the public writings of RMS and others that explain why use of each of the installed non-free packages might cause moral issues for some in the Free Software community. This functionality is not yet included.Description-md5: a02e909414546d8009f6e651de1e013dMulti-Arch: foreignHomepage: vrms.alioth.debian.org/Tag: admin::package-management, implemented-in::perl, interface::commandline, role::program, scope::utility, suite::debian, use::checking, works-with::software:packageSection: adminPriority: optionalFilename: pool/main/v/vrms/vrms_1.17_all.debSize: 12424MD5sum: 41bbcadaae161aa7bc0edb906bf3f787SHA256: 4b1d64fff050c413dfe27a47a6a41eb31b51e97396f1dca13ec5210ebcf4f183

>>>Holla Forums

worse, its communism

If that were true the GPL would have been invented by a kike, you'd see SJWs in every big Free Software project wasting money on muh diversity because not enough abo trans women work in software dev for free, and software would be getting slower instead of faster just so (((Intel))) can separate the goyim from the shekels.

Go away, Holla Forums. Nobody cares about your forced memes about death philosophers.

cnet.com/au/news/bill-gates-and-other-communists/

btfo shill

Is that why the uneducated are so afraid of it?

What if Holla Forums is actually a form of DRM?

You're being sarcastic, right? Stallman's a kike and fucking diversity hippies have been trying to infect the free software world for years.

It's been happening since the beginning of FSF. Stallman's always been a progressive and a liberal.

...

Stallman was pretty right-wing during his youth even used to be called 'fascist' by his kike relatives.
And now he is more of old-stock hippie than a progressive.

This click-bait shite doesn't work without JavaScript.
Here is the correct link
gnu.org/philosophy/bill-gates-and-other-communists.html

What the fuck kind of question is this? If you want to debate that the GPL is DRM, bring an actual argument.