The GPLv3 license is in the works. One of the provisions is to restrict software from using DRM. This, argues Linus Torvalds, is not the job of a license. He is against these new provisions. The article below goes on to defend the license.
I have been deeply against DRM for some time. Linus Torvald’s objection to the license really makes me think. He is the one who got the linux operating system going. I respect his point of view, and am not sure on which side of the fence I stand about the license itself. I am still against DRM.
NewsForge | Stallman, Torvalds, Moglen share views on DRM and GPLv3:
To understand why FSF thinks of DRM as restricting users’ freedom, one needs to understand the meaning of copyleft and the essence of the GPL. This license upheld the four provisions of copyleft:
(a) the freedom to use the software,
(b) the freedom to copy and share the software,
(c) the freedom to modify the software (this requires the source code to be available), and
(d) the freedom to run and distribute modified software.The use of DRM to disallow freedoms (c) and (d) is what FSF doesn’t like. Richard Stallman (RMS), founder of the FSF, calls this situation Tivoization. The term originates from TiVo, a digital video recording device that allows users to record television programs to an internal hard disk for later viewing. Tivo runs on Linux-based software, which means that it is governed by the GPL. That is, the source code is available, the users have the right to modify the source code, and they have the right to run the modified source code.
But with TiVo this doesn’t happen.
While one can modify the source code of TiVo’s Linux-based software, one can’t run it. The product’s DRM enforcement prevents users from running modified versions of the code on their systems. This conflicts with the freedoms and provisions of the GPL. The DRM in this regard acts as a restriction; users are restricted from exercising the right to run the modified source code.