On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
quoted text
> > A third way of stating it is "software for software". No, the romans never 
> > said that, but I just did, to make it just more obvious that the whole 
> > point is that you are expected to answer IN KIND!
> 
> Yes.  And this was precisely what meant when I wrote "quid-pro-quo"
> above.

Ok, so we're on the same page.

"software for software".

quoted text
> > 	"You are either terminally stupid, or you're not allowing yourself 
> > 	 to see an obvious argument, because it destroys your world-view".
> > 
> > The latter is very possible. It's a very human thing.
> 
> /me hands Linus a mirror

"I'm a damn handsome dude, ain't I?"

quoted text
> Serious, what's so hard to understand about:

You're talking about something totally different.

Answer my argument:

 - I think Tivoization is *good*.

 - Your license stops something *good*.

Ergo:

 - Your license is *bad*.

quoted text
> Wrong.  It enables copyright holders to decide whether forgiveness is
> appropriate, rather than forcing them to forgive.  Being forced to
> forgive deception is not tit-for-tat, and it's a losing strategy.

There is NOTHING TO FORGIVE!

Your whole idiotic argument misses the point:

	What Tivo did is *good* in my opinion!

Can't you get that through your skull?

They gave the software back! Be happy! They *followed* the rules. They 
*followed* the tit-for-tat.

			Linus
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/