GPL & Anti-DRM Clause

[D.C. Parris]

I am curious to know what people think about Linus Torvalds' comments on the
anti-DRM clause in the GPLv3 draft.  According to Linus, the GPLv3 (as is)
could cause problems, i.e., when needing to run signed code in the kernel. 
Giving up your private key would make signing the code a moot point.  

Is this really much of an issue? (maybe there's a kernel hacker here?)

Is it desirable/feasible to amend the clause so the FSF can have its cake
and eat it too?  For instance, Linus suggested that the GPL is not the
place to address DRM - rather, it should be addressed in the Creative
Commons licenses.

I am not advocating Linus' position at this point.  I simply want to
understand the issues a little better before making up my mind.  I actually
like the GPLv3 draft, but felt this point raised by Linus was something
that deserves a little more scrutiny.

Thanks,
Don
-- 
DC Parris
The Freely Project (USA)
www.thefreelyproject.org
www.thefreelyproject.us