On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> wrote: > Well, since Freedom 0 is hampered in practice, as well as freedom 3, and > without freedoms 0 and 3, 1 and 2 aren't of much use, I can't label software > oriented towards being DRM friendly as Free Software, in practice.
How are Freedoms 0 and 3 hampered? (For those who don't know what we're talking about, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) On my Freerunner, I can run Android for any purpose, I can make changes to the software and release those changes to the community. OTOH, it's possible that someone could port OM2009 to proprietary hardware. That wouldn't make the hardware free or OM2009 non-free. Arguably it would make the entire system (phone+software) more free than it was. How is Android DRM-friendly? > And software that is only Free Software in theory... well, that doesn't quite > cut it, for me. Again, the FSF, the same folks who define those four freedoms say that is free > >> >> Android is under the APL2, which has even less restriction than the GPL, >> > >> > Only on a superficial level can that be true. It has less restrictions >> > than the >> > GPL because the later tries to make sure everyone has all the essencial >> > freedoms. >> >> According to the FSF, Apache 2 is a free software license: >> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#apache2. > > We're miscommunicating. What I'm saying is that the end result is more > restricted > software rather than more Free Software, hence only from a superficial level > can > it be considered as less restricted. At an atomical level, yes, but life > doesn't > end there :( I see the end result as more free software and the possibility of more restricted software (since someone can always make a proprietary fork). > > I can't properly configure IBM HTTPd Server because IBM (in Portugal) is > claiming not > to support our configuration (more PCI:DSS oriented), so bummer for APL :) If you wanted free software you could have used Apache's HTTP Server, not IBM's. Note that Apache is still free software, even though IBM sells a fork of the Apache code. >> To the extent that the Freerunner is a "free phone" (proprietary bits >> like the GSM modem and wifi notwithstanding), if you run Android on it >> you will be using a free phone with a free as in freedom operating >> system. > > Yes, but I am using my freedom of choice to choose not to support a model > oriented > towards reducing user freedom, and my freedom of speech to advocate against > it. :) Of course you can make that decision. I see Android increasing the total amount of user freedom, especially in the mobile world, which has been almost totally closed up until very recently. Imagine how many more people might be using Freerunners (and how much better shape Openmoko might be in) if Android had come out a year earlier than it did. I hope the availability of Android will eventually drive the release of more open hardware, opening up more choice for all of us, including those like you who don't want to use Android. Jim _______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community