The new version of the most widely used open source licence takes a "highly aggressive" stance against the digital rights management software that's widely favoured in the entertainment industry, said Eben Moglen, general counsel for the Free Software Foundation (FSF).
At a two-day event in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to launch the GPL version three, which governs use of countless free and open source programs, Moglen said the license includes anti-DRM provisions that could put it in conflict with movie studios and even digital video recorder maker TiVo.
On Monday, the Free Software Foundation published a draft of the GPL 3, which is expected to be completed in about a year. The draft states that GPL software cannot use "digital restrictions" on copyright material unless users can control them.
Moglen said that DRM technology, which places limits on how consumers can play movies, music or other digital content, is "fundamentally incompatible" with the principles of the FSF. Moglen and Free Software Foundation founder Richard Stallman are co-authors of GPL 3.
"Mr Stallman made perfectly clear that his point of view is: It's enough. It's enough that the world has to pay attention to that [DRM] problem the way the world needed to pay attention to the patent problem 10 years ago," Moglen said in an interview with ZDNet UK sister site CNET News.com.
"I recognise that that's a highly aggressive position, but it's not an aggression which we thought up. It's a defence related to an aggression which was launched against the people whose rights are our primary concern," he added.
Moglen said DRM systems that take control out of people's hands or violate their privacy do not respect free software users' rights and therefore are in conflict with the forthcoming GPL provisions.
The planned anti-DRM changes to the GPL are significant because the entertainment industry regularly uses Linux-powered computers in the production process, notably for special effects and animation. In general, movie studios support DRM technology.
It's not clear whether the Linux operating system kernel will be governed by version three of the GPL when the new licence is released; creator Linus Torvalds specifically didn't follow the Free Software Foundation's recommendation to describe a software project as governed by version 2 or "any later version." However, many other components of the operating system, such as the GLIBC library of supporting software and the GCC compiler, are expected to move to GPL 3.
Moglen and Stallman have voiced concern specifically with TiVo, which uses Linux, because the company collects information on consumers' actions. Moglen said TiVo complied with version 2 of the GPL "by the skin of its teeth" and said the company will find more difficulty complying with GPL version three's anti-DRM provisions.
"Having a personal video recorder which reports every button you push to headquarters when you use the remote control — and which won't run software if you modify the box so it snoops on you a little less — is not user-respecting conduct," he said.
"What TiVo needs to do — what everybody needs to do who makes electronic devices — is to stop injuring users to help movie companies. We don't want our software used in a way which batters the head of the user to please somebody else. Our goal is the protection of users' rights, not movies' rights," Moglen said.
He said Hollywood studios that use open source software, namely Linux, to create animated movies yet deny users' freedoms are "flat unfair".
Separately, Moglen sought to allay concerns that the GPL version 3 requires application hosting companies to provide the source code for software delivered as a service over the Internet.
"It is clear that in this draft we have not changed those rules at all," he said.
CNET News.com's Stephen Shankland contributed to this report.






Talkback
I agree with what they are saying and trying to accomplish, but I am not sure whether this will not do more harm than good for the GPL and OSS...
I agree that TiVo HQ doesn't need to know what I do with the device in the comfort of my own home, and I am sick of the movie companies treating me like a criminal because I decided to buy a DVD as opposed to download it off the net!
But I am not sure the GPL is the right forum for expressing this. Alienating companies just as they are starting to show interest in OSS and GPL isn't the best way to win friends and influence people.
I've yet to see a positive effect of DRM... Having originally ripped all my CD's to WMA format when WMP was first released, then having to re-install Windows and finding all the hours or ripping were wasted because Windows had a new ID and couldn't play my music any more pretty much put me off to start with, and it only seems to be getting more draconian...
I just don't want to see GPL getting side-tracked into the DRM debate...
When will the filthy rich morons learn? If we can see it or hear it - we can copy it! Simple as that. No technology will ever be able to prevent us from recording anything we see or hear.
Technology has advanced so far that anyone can use a digital video camera tucked away in a pocket with a mini lens mounted in a pair of sunglasses so it can't be seen. Any sound or image can be recorded in digital quality.
There will always be methods for transmitting the recorded sounds and images too anyone we want over the Internet - which isn't going away anytime soon.
Stallman's on the mark again, good to see some people care about users rights.
Good work Stallman and Moglen.
About possible changes to the new draft.
"Moglen: What won't change is the ethics. What won't change is the commitment to users' freedoms. What will change is (that) people will tell us facts about the world and facts about how free software is used and distributed that we don't know. They may know facts about how the license can be evaded that we don't know, and they may find bugs, failures to do what we thought we were doing"
Well I was wondering about the story
"Following the GPL into battle with GP2x" in
Free Software Magazine.
And as TIVO was mentioned how did the "problem" with Cisco turn out.
Regards,
DRM and "Disney" etc.
As that (Disney) part of the industry is set on "restricting" I feel they have also restricted their brains, their ability to think.
As the opinion against "piracy" is as strong within the OSS community as in the "Disney" -community I think that, perhaps, the only group of people who could come up with a working and fair solution to the problem are persons like Moglen and Stallman.
I belive the restricted brains in Hollywood are in desperate need of help.
An optimist.
DRM isnt meant to be a benefit to users, its to stop criminals pirating software/music (and criminals seem to be a significant % of the people who post here)
If you pirate software/music you are no better than a shoplifter/street mugger and should be treated like one
DRM is neither for users or criminals. (criminals always know how to circumvent them).
DRM is a commercial strategy of a given company, technically enforced. I don't want my DVD to play on a given zone ? It's quasi-illegal to enforce because of international trade laws ? No problem, because now, it's legally enforced, even if it's against any other law !
The same with restrictions to fair use : they are illegal, but circumvent them is illegal too...
Imagine peanut butter (or Nutella) sellers that would enforce the use of compatible spoons via special caps. And now imagine that it would be illegal to change the caps for others, or, as in Europe now, to just give information about how to use another spoon...
It's the big, big favor the entertainment industry had from the lawmakers : they can make any restriction they want, limit where and how their movies/music/books will be seen, and that's not only a commercial choice, but it become a private law...
The arguments that DRM restricts people using music/software that people have paid for is all very well but isnt the real agenda
DRM stops piracy , peopele who dont want to pay anything (and even basic protection will stop the majority of people).
Its a fact that people cant accept you do not own the music on a CD you buy, you only own the right to play it, the internet does NOT change this
Dear Reader,
Quite frankly, I am getting SICK of all this 'so called' "protection" && "safetety measures" to "protect" us !! Against OURSELVES ??????????????
Like DRM, the evil "fritz chip" (this damn thing is to be build in pretty much EVERY electronic gadget && IT-hardware /device for sale at the end of this year...)
When I buy an article - what ever the hack it is - it is MINE !!
As long as I don't use it in a clearly criminal way - I should be free to do so without being censored, remote-controlled or manipulated or spied on or what the f**k ever !
Anyone trying to control it by e.g. the WWWeb, RFID or whatever is in for a, ehhhh, "little" suprise...
To destroy PFID-tags see: https://events.ccc.de/congress/2005/wiki/RFID-Zapper(EN)
(This little thing really works - It might protect your against being tracked && spyed on just doing "your thing"...)
Since I'm one of the "ancient" Hackers && "real programmers" (being in && with IT for over 30 years) - I'm quite capable getting rid of (almost)
every dirty censor && control && manipulation trick the evil empire && other powermongers can "throw up" against me && all the other decent TAXPAYING citizens...
(I'm an old assembly-programmer && I LOVE Open_Source && GPL-3 && GNU because it represents the ESSENCE of science: the open && free exchange of ALL relevant information).
Yes, I'm p*ss*d off by the "puppet governments" owned by multinational corporations trying to control EVERY bit of information-exchange - finally even
the information going from one neuron to another WITHIN MY (&& your) OWN BRAIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey corporated dudes - I'm not your Goddamned BORG DRONE ! You haven't "assimilated" ME yet && you never will - not even over my dead body !
If (The good God forbids) this blatant MADNESS is going on the way it is I might even turn into ... an evil BLACK HAT HACKER !!! At the extreme far end of the deepest dark side...
I used to be an (Linux) senior security-expert - but now I a'm pondering on what I should do - what is ethically correct...
Mind you - until now every so called "protection-system" I managed to CRACK - because you guys can't even write ONE BIT of decent code !
Btw. Reversed engineering happens to be one of my favorite passtimes...
If these power-insane moroms want to see what my CIV can do IF I release it from my BioHazard-Level-4-IT-Laboratory -go on f**king up human rights !!!.
(CIV = Computer Immuno-deficiency Virus. It does pretty much to computers && servers what HIV does to humans. Platform-independant... Catching my (outraged) drift...??? ).
STOP this control/censor/manipulation-madness, for Gods (and our) sake... OR ELSE !
Mind you - every anti-human-rights action creates its own opposition, and it is growing faster than the evil b*stards can imagine...
Ever read about the French Revolution ??? I know how a guillotine works && has to be build && operate it... ;-)
Learn history and avoid repeating those stupid && inhumane && sick mistakes over && over && over && over again...
(Sorry for this emotional posting - mind you, dear reader, I'm really getting sick of this sh*t... I want to be able to use MY hard && software the way that pleases me && my customers without some cretins conTROLL).
Yours, Ol' (Alien) Hacker.