GPL 3 Draft

Posted in Computers & Technology, Education, Law, Politics by Elliott Back on January 18th, 2006.

I was gently browsing through the new GPL draft when I found some paragraphs like the following:

Some countries have adopted laws prohibiting software that enables users to escape from Digital Restrictions Management. DRM is fundamentally incompatible with the purpose of the GPL, which is to protect users’ freedom; therefore, the GPL ensures that the software it covers will neither be subject to, nor subject other works to, digital restrictions from which escape is forbidden.

Is it just me, or have the writers of this draft tried their best to employ the most vague and indescipherable English available, as if to write a legal document is to obfuscate and confuse. What is a “restriction from which escape is forbidden?” Does this mean that works under the GPL must be able to run away from Digital Rights Management technologies? What if I write a DRM program–does this mean I can’t release it under the terms of the GPL 3? Why is a Vendetta against DRM included in the preamble to the new GPL?

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 18th, 2006 at 6:42 pm and is tagged with digital rights management, management technologies, legal document, drm, preamble, vendetta, gpl 3, paragraphs, restriction, that enables users, freedom. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback.

Viewing 3 Comments

shorty114 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Actually, it makes sense. Free software (by GNU definition) is freely distributable, modifiable and usable software. DRM's (e.g. the iTunes Music Store one) prevent distribution of the music.

reply edit reblog flag

http://shorty114.net/

ceejayoz 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

But the music isn't the software, shorty114.

I don't see why Apple shouldn't be allowed to GPL iTunes without having to permit any and all usages of the protected songs if they felt like it.

reply edit reblog flag

http://ceejayoz.com/

inaequitas 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

What this aims to cover is issues like the Sony rootkit; part of that software had LGPL'ed code inside and it was used to restrict others' free use of software and other electronic technology. I think GPLv3 aims at not allowing those kinds of things from happening; but I'm not sure this is precise. If the iTunes was not the one enforcing DRMs, but a different application, as long as iTunes was not 'touching' any DRM aspect [including, I think, trying to see if DRM is present] then it could be GPL'ed.

reply edit reblog flag

http://hackd.blogspot.com