samba - Mar 2016 - The sad state of samba 4 adaption for home/small business routers.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba
> on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no
> DRM.
>
> If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or
> newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please
> let us know so we can start the compliance process.
I wonder how that will play out with the new US FCC rules causing some 
manufacturers to disallow installing 3rd party firmware:

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/tp-link-blocks-open-source-router-firmware-to-comply-with-new-fcc-rule/

Maybe they will just not include samba, or other GPLv3 software?

Am 12.03.2016 um 18:08 schrieb Sketch:
> On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jeremy Allison wrote:
>
>> GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba
>> on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no
>> DRM.
>>
>> If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or
>> newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please
>> let us know so we can start the compliance process.
>
> I wonder how that will play out with the new US FCC rules causing some
> manufacturers to disallow installing 3rd party firmware:
>
>
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/tp-link-blocks-open-source-router-firmware-to-comply-with-new-fcc-rule/
> Maybe they will just not include samba, or other GPLv3 software?
independent of the FCC - the logical result of "start the compliance 
process" against a hardware manufacturer which sells a router and add a 
goodie like samba is keep out the goodies in the next version



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba/attachments/20160312/30d6920a/signature.sig>

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 06:15:30PM +0100, Reindl Harald
wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 12.03.2016 um 18:08 schrieb Sketch:
> >On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> >
> >>GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba
> >>on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no
> >>DRM.
> >>
> >>If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or
> >>newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please
> >>let us know so we can start the compliance process.
> >
> >I wonder how that will play out with the new US FCC rules causing some
> >manufacturers to disallow installing 3rd party firmware:
> >
>
>http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/tp-link-blocks-open-source-router-firmware-to-comply-with-new-fcc-rule/
> >Maybe they will just not include samba, or other GPLv3 software?
> 
> independent of the FCC - the logical result of "start the compliance
> process" against a hardware manufacturer which sells a router and add
a
> goodie like samba is keep out the goodies in the next version
That's their choice. They need to comply with all
licenses of software included in their product.

This kind of attitude "well if you *insist* people
follow your license then..." is amazing to me.

What do you think would happen if such products
included Microsoft or Oracle software ? Do you
think they'd overlook license violations to
"keep the goodies in the next version" ?