Re: [Fsfe-uk] Explanation of Tivosiation and problems - comments sought

[Alex Hudson]

On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 09:12 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> Chris Croughton <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I don't see the locking of an appliance so that unqualified people can't
> > monkey with it a a bad thing.
> 
> I do.  If I can't buy servicing and spares on the open market, it
> limits the servicers and suppliers I can choose, reducing the
> incentives for workers to provide reliable service at reasonable cost.

I think there's a couple of different arguments being mixed up here.

Personally, I have no problem with many types of equipment being
off-limits either legally or physically, or even just morally. Having
someone meddle with electronics they don't understand, to me, is as
morally dubious as driving an unsafe vehicle on the road. I say this
mainly as someone who has been electrocuted a number of times by faulty
installations, though only once involving mains, and having seen a lot
of equipment which I couldn't in good conscience use.

I also understand manufacturers whose warranty and/or support ends at
the moment you open the box on something. 

I think, though, the arguments about safety and support are separate
from the general point about hardware being "locked" somehow. Having a
Tivo prevent you from installing new software doesn't really improve the
safety of the device (I assume), and while I could understand Tivo not
supporting people who do that, that is surely a choice for the end user
(and presumably Tivo wouldn't bleat at the fact that their obligation
had ended early).

I suspect the main issue is that there isn't a black/white "this is
closed" test. There will always be certain types of limitations that
exist, and once something becomes a continuum, arguments based on where
you ought to be on that continuum become basically relativistic.

I am slightly worried by certain corner cases of the way the GPLv3
addresses signed binaries - e.g., if you're supplying firewalls to
people, and the firewalls are meddle-proof (which IMHO is a feature, in
this instance), you'd be more or less forced to provide per-user
binaries signed with different keys in order to comply (as I understand
it, anyway), which is a bit of a burden. I suppose there are likely
other technological solutions to that problem, though.

I will be interested to see if GPLv3 makes any real difference to
"Tivoisation" at the end of the day. I suspect the only benefit will be
a wider range of manufacturers who are obviously violating the license,
and to whom enforcement persuasion can be easily applied. Those who
understand the license and want to use the software will just find other
ways of locking the unit down - it could only make a difference where
100% of the software on the unit is covered by GPLv3 (or licenses with
similar clauses), which AIUI is rarely the case.

Cheers,

Alex.