Some people can be "bad" for the community. They may simply be disruptive and not productive at all. They may troll the mailing lists without actually ever doing something good, or they may do other "bad" things.
In fact, let's make it *very* specific: let's say that the bad person is a cracker, and specializes in finding security holes, and writing exploits for them, and selling those exploits to spammers.
Most of us might agree that that is a "bad" person for the community, no?
Now, by your own logic, let's look at what that means for the license. Should we write into our copyright license that you cannot try to find security holes? Would that be a good addition to the GPLv2?
Now, I stated that in a way where the answer is obvious: that would be a *horrible* addition to the GPLv2. I think everybody can agree on that. It would be really stupid to say "you cannot look for security holes" just because *some* people who do it are bad.
Now, think about that for a moment, and then go back to your question about whether Tivo is bad for the community, and whether being bad for the community should mean that the license should be written to say "go away and don't use future improvements to our software".
See where I'm trying to take you?
I think that even people who *do* think that what Tivo did was "bad", should think very deeply about the issue whether you should try to lock out "bad uses" in your license. Yes, the answer may be "yes, you should". But I'm arguing that the answer _may_ also be: "No, you shouldn't, becasue it turns out that you might lock out _good_ people too".
So in my cracker/spammer example, by trying to lock out the bad people, the obvious (and _stupid_ - don't get me wrong, I'm not at *all* suggesting anything like that should ever be done) license addition of "don't expose security problems" actually just causes more problems than it solves (if it solves anything at all - really bad people don't actually tend to even care about the license!).
其實我很早以前就想寫一篇這樣的文章，我使用 Linux 來生活已經六年多了，用到現在，覺得很多地方很便利好用，適合我這種懶惰的人。奇怪的是有一群幾近瘋子的人，無任何報酬地在開發維護，讓我覺得很不可思 議。在此分享一點心得給想接觸 Linux 的人，算是回饋吧，也許微不足道。別跟我筆戰 Windows 和 Linux 誰比較強的問題，那沒有意義。各有各好用的地方，只是個人習慣問題而已，就像是吃飯或吃麵一樣。不可能有人會筆戰飯跟麵哪個比較好吃吧？
我最一開始用的是 Red Hat 6.2，用了半年換 Mandrake，幾個月後又換 Debian Woody、Sarge，然後用了好幾年。在某一次電腦掛掉要重灌的情況下，我選擇了 Gentoo 2005.0 作為我重新出發的起點，用了一年多。這幾個月換成 Ubuntu，覺得非常好用，很多設計都很方便簡單，所以我到處推薦給別人用這版本，它的基本精神就是人道關懷。很多人有迷思認為用 Gentoo 比較屌，用 Ubuntu 比較遜。但我覺得只要能方便地解決問題，用什麼都不是重點。
Windows模擬：請用 Wine，絕大部分XP的Game或商業軟體，都是用這個在 Linux 底下運行。如果是模擬器，推薦 virtualbox，一定要試這個。裝精簡版 XP Lite，簡直天下無敵。最近有個很火熱的 KVM 擬模器，搭配最新的核心 2.6.20，我試不出來…囧。（好像是我的CPU不支援）
Windows遊戲：有兩套商業軟體（要用錢買），Cedega 是專業的遊戲模擬平台，可以用 Cedega 灌 Windows 的遊戲，據說支援 95% 的遊戲，因我本身沒有在玩遊戲，所以我只試用魔獸、暗黑破壞神2…等主流遊戲，擬真度 99%，很強；另一套商業軟體叫 CrossOver，也是 Windows 的模擬平台，主要是灌大型商業軟體使用，如 Dreamweaver、Photoshop、Office…等。這兩個模擬器的核心都是 Wine，軟體本身透過安裝不同軟體進行微調最佳化，所以要收費，如果想試用的話，你知道的…，進牧場找一下很容易可以找到。
（以下圖片是我用 virtualbox 裝 windows xp 當子系統，因為我借不到繁體光碟，所以就抓了簡體版XP，題外話，那個 deepin Xp Lite 真的改的不錯，超級小，才兩三百MB，虛擬機跑起來跟實機一樣快。P.S. 我是灌來做 flash 的…囧）
有遺漏或新發現的我會再補上，不過這樣已經足以讓我用 Linux 用得很快樂了，希望你也可以在其中找到樂趣。以上所有軟體都可以在 APT source 裡面找到，如果有找不到的，請到 GetDeb 網站找找 － http://www.getdeb.net/。
Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run modified versions of the software inside them, although the manufacturer can do so. This is fundamentally incompatible with the aim of protecting users' freedom to change the software. The systematic pattern of such abuse occurs in the area of products for individuals to use, which is precisely where it is most unacceptable. Therefore, we have designed this version of the GPL to prohibit the practice for those products. If such problems arise substantially in other domains, we stand ready to extend this provision to those domains in future versions of the GPL, as needed to protect the freedom of users. 某些裝置的設計，限制了使用者在他們的裝置中存取或安裝修改版軟體的權利，而裝置的生產廠家卻可以。這完全違背了保護使用者自由修改軟體之精神。此類發生在個人裝置上的行為是不可接受的。因此，我們設計了本版的GPL以禁止此類產品的出現。如果類型相同的問題在其他領域發生，為了保護使用者的自由，我們也已準備在未來版本的GPL延伸至此領域。
... The more permissive license actually allows more people to get involved. And the only thing that really *matters* (the source code) can be distributed and improved on by all these different people, even if some of them may have their hands bound by legal issues. ...越寬容的許可證就允許越多群眾參與。而許可證對原始碼真正有意義的事就是讓這些不同的人散佈與改進，即使那些人之中可能有些會被法律爭議所束縛。
