On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 7:42 PM ilobmirt via Freedos-devel wrote: [..] > In this instance, I see the contemplation of complying in advance, > removing FDNPKG & FDNPKG16 before they assuage the sensibilities of > lawmakers on a power trip - who feel they have the divine right to > compel the shape of the internet and software of the future - who feel > that the 1st and 4th amendment makes a good 2-ply. > > Are we really here making space to sate the sensibilities of law-makers > that want to control free software? If FDNPKG is not safe - no package > is safe. The only correct move is to create friction, push back, and > organize. [..]
You might want to re-read what I wrote. Let's not get distracted by misinterpreting. I didn't say to remove FDNPKG & FDNPKG16 beforehand. I said to watch what California is doing and consider removing FDNPKG & FDNPKG *if* California "doesn't change the 'app store' part of the law." Specifically, I wrote: :: I will definitely be following this one very closely. But we might :: consider removing FDNPKG/FDNPKG16 from the FreeDOS distribution if :: California makes the changes to the "operating system" part of the :: law, but doesn't change the "app store" part of the law. :: :: That also suggests we should start moving toward a "FreeDOS 1.5" :: distribution, to be released before the end of 2026, with any changes :: that will exclude us from the age-verification laws. We can discuss :: "FreeDOS 1.5" in a separate email thread, not this one. And I agree about pushing back and organizing. If you live in Colorado or California, call your representatives. Actually, call your representatives no matter where you live -- your state representatives and your US representatives. I'm already connecting with mine. __ > On 4/27/26 8:28 PM, Jim Hall via Freedos-devel wrote: > > I've been following the age-verification laws, since that has an > > impact on any open source operating system project (potentially > > including FreeDOS). I wanted to share a few updates: > > > > First, it appears that Colorado's age verification law (SB26-051) > > *might* be amended to exclude open source operating systems. > > Specifically, any operating system provider or developer that > > distributes the operating system (or app) under license terms that > > permit users to copy, modify, and redistribute it. But if you sell the > > operating system, then you still fall under SB26-051. > > > > *Original version: (without amendments) > > https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-051 > > > > So that's good. We'll have to keep an eye on that one, but this is a > > good change in direction. > > > > > > Second, I've been talking with another open source organization about > > the California law (AB-1043). The other organization doesn't want to > > go on record right now because they aren't a lobbying organization, > > but it's a recognizable name. They've also been working with other > > open source projects and organizations, and having similar discussions > > about AB-1043. I don't think this person wanted me to name those other > > organizations and projects, but you'd recognize some of them as big > > projects and big players in open source. > > > > *Original version: (California) > > https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 > > > > There have been some discussions with California lawmakers about > > AB-1043, and I understand lawmakers are discussing a set of proposed > > changes that would carve out an exception for open source operating > > systems (like FreeDOS). > > > > Specifically, the proposed changes include wording that changes who is > > an 'operating system provider' to someone who sells or supplies the > > operating system for a fee. If they go forward with the proposed > > changes, FreeDOS (as an operating system) should be exempted from > > AB-1043. > > > > However, the changes to AB-1043 still have some language about 'app > > stores' that bothers me. The way they seem to define this *could* > > include a mechanism or app that downloads and installs programs from a > > central repository. To me, that "smells" like any network-aware > > package manager that can download programs from a repository and > > install them. > > > > Specifically, that sounds too close to FDNPKG and FDNPKG16. > > > > I will definitely be following this one very closely. But we might > > consider removing FDNPKG/FDNPKG16 from the FreeDOS distribution if > > California makes the changes to the "operating system" part of the > > law, but doesn't change the "app store" part of the law. > > > > That also suggests we should start moving toward a "FreeDOS 1.5" > > distribution, to be released before the end of 2026, with any changes > > that will exclude us from the age-verification laws. We can discuss > > "FreeDOS 1.5" in a separate email thread, not this one. > > > > __ > > > > Also: > > If you live in California or Colorado, please talk to your > > representatives. Meet with them or their staffers if you can; it > > really has an impact. If you can't meet with them, send a letter > > and/or make a phone call to their office to discuss it. Be respectful; > > having worked with government folks before, I know that lawmakers tend > > to discount "shouty" people. > > > > __ > > > > Also also: > > If you don't live in the US, I can understand seeing these > > age-verification laws as silly and stupid (and they are) but those of > > us in the US can't ignore them. Note that there's a significant $$ > > penalty for each minor affected by a noncompliant operating system or > > app store. > > > > FreeDOS doesn't have a "foundation" like other larger open source > > projects; we're just a collection of developers working on a (very > > cool) open source operating system. But without a legal entity to > > cover us, any penalties would fall to individuals, like me or you. And > > obviously I don't want that. > > > > I'm not ready to consider "giving up" FreeDOS from a legal perspective > > (i.e. legally separating "me" from "FreeDOS" in some way) but I've got > > that in the back of my mind, in case they don't change the laws before > > they go into effect in January 2027. _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
