Re: Hardware license
Scripsit Thomas Uwe Gruettmueller <email@example.com>
> 3. AFAIK, the copyleft in the GPL is not strong enough to
> prevent that a chip that has been built from a GPLed design
> is bought by a non-licensee, and resold, soldered into a
> non-free circuit. This is like creating a non-free artwork
> out of Debian CDs, but far more severe. I am not sure if
> there is a possible strategy about this at all, and what the
> OHGPL is doing about this.
I was about to complain about this too, but then I realized that the
situation is not really that different from that of software.
Say that you have a lot of CDs containing binaries of various GPLed
programs manufactured. You sell a bunch of your discs to me, and also
send me a home-burned CD containing the source. The GPL explicitly
entitles you to do this.
I throw away the source CD and then start selling the binary discs
from my retail store. My poor customers will be left with binaries and
no way to get source, much contrary to the intentions behind the
GPL. Now what *I* am doing is not really blessed by the GPL, but I
don't need to care - because I'm not doing any *copying*, I don't need
any copyright license, so I don't need to accept the GPL.
As far as I can see, this is essentially the same scenario as the
hardware one you're referring to, isn't it?
Henning Makholm "Monarki, er ikke noget materielt ... Borger!"