Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   xue (xue@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Jan-2023 18:01:49 JST xue

   • mdn
   @mangeurdenuage Elon and Tesla is interesing on that one
   they use linux but last time ive checked they dont open-source anything
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Jan-2023 18:01:47 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • mdn
     @xue >Elon and Tesla is interesing on that one >they use linux but last time ive checked they dont open-source anything
     The kernel, Linux isn't even "open source", it's proprietary software.
     
     Telsa got caught violating the GPLv2 multiple times, but they had to do at least partially what was legally required something or get sued: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2018/may/18/tesla-incomplete-ccs/
     The last time I checked the source wasn't complete.
     
     
     @mangeurdenuage >the GPLv2 has a loophole
     It doesn't.
     
     I don't see a loophole in: " The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable."
     
     It doesn't say "object code" or "binary", it says *executable*, as in a program that actually executes.
     
     You haven't provided the source code and the scripts used to control installation if you can't compile and install a binary that works on the device.
     
     
     Of course, getting a judge and lawyers to understand this is quite difficult and there has been a lack of enforcement, so lots of companies sadly keep getting away with violating the GPLv2.
     
     Still, any effort in enforcing specifically that clause in the GPLv2 is usually better spent upgrading to the GPLv3-or-later or the GPLv2-or-later, to put an eventual end to that problem.
     
     
     The GPLv3 really is just some clarifications that made it crystal clear what was meant and also less restrictions, as there's more library exceptions for the case where free software is running on a OS or runtime with a GPLv3-incompatible license.
   • Embed this notice
     mdn (mangeurdenuage@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Jan-2023 18:01:48 JST mdn

     in reply to
     @xue Even toyota uses the linux, Kernel, the issue is that the GPLv2 has a loophole that GPLv3 fixed.
     You see companies don't have to automatically share the source to people, in the GPLv2 and GPLv3 people/car owners have to request the source code or the modified source code too have it.
     But in GPLv2 that doesn't mean that tesla has to allow people to replace the code by a modified version that you would have done yourself, that's the big loophole of v2, DRM/tivoization, which v3 fixes.
     
     This is the exact same problem with android's linux kernel. All these companies love ""open source"" as long as they can create their walled garden.
   • Embed this notice
     mdn (mangeurdenuage@shitposter.club)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Jan-2023 19:05:11 JST mdn

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • sysrq
     @xue @Suiseiseki @sysrq I'm not even talking about the gpl, just laws and their application in general.
   • Embed this notice
     mdn (mangeurdenuage@shitposter.club)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Jan-2023 19:05:12 JST mdn

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • sysrq
     @sysrq @Suiseiseki @xue
     Yes I agree fuck da low, but that doesn't stop people from applying the current rulesets.
     All of it is indeed bound to either trust or blind faith, you can't just ignore the reality that people choose to apply, you can oppose/disagree with it of course that isn't the issue, but one cannot say "you can't do that" while they actually can and will do something you disagree with.
     That's why in such context ignoring the ruleset they choose to live with is more damaging to your own ideology. That doesn't mean you have to apply or agree with them, but it means that you'd might have to adapt, or not, because they are the main force or ruleset enforcement.
   • Embed this notice
     xue (xue@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Jan-2023 19:05:12 JST xue

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • mdn
     • sysrq
     @mangeurdenuage @sysrq @Suiseiseki
     
     GPL AUSTIST GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY NOTIFICATIONS REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
     翠星石 repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     sysrq (sysrq@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Jan-2023 19:05:13 JST sysrq

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • mdn
     @Suiseiseki @mangeurdenuage @xue
     licenses don't matter, fuck da law