GPLv3

Comment 2552: doesn't ability to void the warrantee remove the need for "User Product" language?

Regarding the text: The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a requirement to continue to provide support service, warranty, or updates for a work that has been modified or installed by the recipient.
In section: gpl3.nonsource.p10.s1
Submitted by: stevenj on 2007-03-29 at 12:47 EST
3 agree: alexbk, illy, flaschen
noted by stevenj on 2007-03-29 at 12:47 EST:

According to the rationale, the reason for the "User Product" language was that certain large enterprise customers prefer not to have the DRM keys, because they want the vendor to control their system updates.

However, according to this text, can't the vendor simply say that they will no longer update or warrantee the system if the user employs the DRM keys to modify it? It seems that this should remove the need for the controversial "User Product" language.

collapse children