Comment Re:GPLv3, section 6 (Score 1) 120
> That section says that if you give someone a device with software that's supposed to come with the freedom to run, study, modify, and redistribute, then you can't prevent them from modifying the software on that device and running it
Well, no. It says that a product sold in a certain market that comes with GPL-licensed software must come with the tools to enable running modified software on the device.
> Where's the controversy?
"Controversy" wasn't an issue. "Anti-business" was. And that restriction is anti-business.
> GPLv3 didn't create the problem of locked down devices.
No, it just adopted a mind-bogglingly stupid approach to addressing them. It doesn't require certain features in certain markets for software integrated with GPL software, it requires legal freedoms and availability of the preferred form for making modifications, without regard to markets.It could have taken an open-hardware approach for hardware integrated with GPL software, which would have been sane and connected to software freedom, but instead it adopted a system of market-based restrictions on features, which isn't just anti-business (as, to an extent, any mechanism of preventing the continuation of an emerging business model is likely to be), but also anti-software-freedom, as it constrains the utility of GPL-licensed software for particular uses.