and this is why i dislike the GPLv3. the GPLv2 was all about the source, so the conversation between developers and everyone else was "you can take my source and modify it all you want, but i want to see the changes". sounds fair.
GPLv3 (ignoring the fix for the loophole with web applications) adds *nothing* to this premise. instead, it's used as an ideological club such that the conversation is now "i have all these ideas about how software should and shouldnt be utilized, so if you want to use my software, you too now have to subscribe to my way of thinking and you have to show me the changes".
so what does moving from GPLv2 to GPLv3 gain us in terms of protections ? nothing. it does however allow us to restrict the people who want to use u- boot to using it in only ways we've "blessed". that's plain wrong in my eyes and none of our business in the first place.
I think it is not a coincidence that devices which can be updated with arbitrary firmware sells pretty good in the meantime. Who buys routers capable of running OpenWRT because of their original firmware?
then let your wallet/politicians do the talking. i certainly do -- i avoid purchasing any music/games encumbered with DRM, or companies that employ such methods. but i'm above going around and forcing people to think the way i do with licenses.
agreed with Mike.
Best Regards, J.