Submission + - Should developers switch to GPLv3?
Isaac IANAL writes: Victor Loh of ExtremeTech writes about the General Public License version 3's clause, which requires releasing digital signature keys — in other words, the software should be able to retain interoperability when modified. The article raises an objection, citing Linus Torvalds, that the so-called TiVoisation clause would inhibit open-source adoption in embedded devices among entities such as governments, health care providers, and finance firms.
The issue has been discussed on Slashdot many times before.
If you're a developer for a platform that needs to run signed code, could you use software under the GPLv3, or does the GPLv3 (at its current, unreleased state) truely inhibit your control as a developer over your device?
The issue has been discussed on Slashdot many times before.
If you're a developer for a platform that needs to run signed code, could you use software under the GPLv3, or does the GPLv3 (at its current, unreleased state) truely inhibit your control as a developer over your device?
