Re: gEDA-user: GPLv3 question

[asomers@xxxxxxxxx]

No.  GPLv3 says that it must be _possible_ for the user to update his
GPLed code, but it need not be easy.  You can even ship GPLv3 code in
an OTP chip.  Basically, just don't use DRM to prevent the user from
changing his code when he could otherwise.  The intent is to prevent
GPLed code from being locked down, trusted computing style.

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Geoff Swan <shinobi.jack@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So just to clarify - if you distribute an embedded device that runs a
> GPLv3 binary; to comply with the GPLv3 you must not only provide the
> source, but also a hardware-programmer/uploader?
> I suppose in most cases this isn't necessarily a huge issue - where
> firmware upgrade capability is built into the device (such as most
> routers, and development style boards).
>
> I play with the Atmel AVR range a fair bit and typically only create
> boards that require a separate hardware programmer to upload firmware.
> In this case to distribute such a board with GPLv3 firmware I would
> technically need to provide the in-circuit-programmer with the board
> and source.
>
> I could imagine in some cases the uC may be programmed *before* it is
> soldered in place and no mechanism provided by the circuit for
> firmware modification. In this case I presume you would not be able to
> make use of GPLv3 firmware - as no mechinism is readily available to
> modify the firmware...
>
> I know these are perhaps somewhat unrealistic scenarios - but if I
> have understood them correctly it certainly seems that GPLv3 could
> have been a little more embedded platform friendly.
>
>
> cheers,
>
> Geoff
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 7:01 AM, DJ Delorie <dj@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> You don't need to deliver *any* source code unless it is requested
>>> by the user.
>>
>> In the case of an embedded product, with GPLv3, the *only* way to not
>> include the source is to include the written offer, which opens you up
>> for a DDNS.  You can only use the "web download" option if the binary
>> is itself "web downloaded".
>>
>> Also - for embedded products, to comply with GPLv3 you must enable the
>> user to change the code *in the device*.  Just providing source code
>> isn't enough unless they can use it too.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geda-user mailing list
>> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user