Re: Overlap between the Software Freedom movement and the Right to Repair?
On 29/04/2021 18:06, Greg Knittl wrote: Hi Lars, The various GNU licences rely on copyright. I'm not sure if this is just trying to make the best of a bad situation by hacking copyright into it's opposite or whether belief in copyright is intrinsic to Software Freedom. Whatever the Software Freedom take is, I'm very much in favour of the right to repair. If only to reduce the amount of e-waste we generate. I'm in favour of a fundamental right to minimize one's carbon footprint, that would outweigh copyright when copyright gets in the way of repair and reuse in cases where it is less carbon intensive to repair and reuse than to build new. I see this as complimentary to and enhancing the right to repair which I'm sure has other good justifications independent of carbon footprint. The potential conflict with Software Freedom being that overriding copyright might override the Software Freedom attempt to hack copyright into it's opposite and the sharing that enforces. Greg I too,agree with right to repair, on the basis that repairing devices can reduce e-waste and therefore our own carbon footprint. This is especially useful when the fault, is something very simple that can be fixed. I think this is more a moral, ethical issue, allowing ewaste to pile high, removing more rare eath elements from the ground , and the associated damage (and in some cases exploitation) that comes with this, is really important to consider, we can't keep taking these elements from the ground, without considering the consequences of doing so. Children and young people understand this, they understand what is happening to the planet. they look to us to take action to protect the planet, and are also holding adults to account and blaming US for the damage being done to the planet. There is also a finite supply, Paul OpenPGP_0x8EA91B51E27E3D99.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
Re: Overlap between the Software Freedom movement and the Right to Repair?
Hi Lars, The various GNU licences rely on copyright. I'm not sure if this is just trying to make the best of a bad situation by hacking copyright into it's opposite or whether belief in copyright is intrinsic to Software Freedom. Whatever the Software Freedom take is, I'm very much in favour of the right to repair. If only to reduce the amount of e-waste we generate. I'm in favour of a fundamental right to minimize one's carbon footprint, that would outweigh copyright when copyright gets in the way of repair and reuse in cases where it is less carbon intensive to repair and reuse than to build new. I see this as complimentary to and enhancing the right to repair which I'm sure has other good justifications independent of carbon footprint. The potential conflict with Software Freedom being that overriding copyright might override the Software Freedom attempt to hack copyright into it's opposite and the sharing that enforces. Greg On 2021-04-29 5:05 a.m., Lars Noodén wrote: In what ways, if any, do people consider it feasible for the Right To Repair and Software Freedom groups collaborate on the specific areas where there is overlap? If this has been discussed before please point me to the relevant archives. I've listened to a recent monologue and a short documentary on the Right To Repair [1] and it seems that there is an area of overlap between the Right To Repair movement and the Software Freedom movement. There are, of course, areas where they diverge since they focus mostly on hardware, but where they do overlap, there could be some collaboration because proprietary software is becoming a greater and greater factor inhibiting modding and even basic repair. One example which involves components familiar here is about refurbishing used computers. Some years ago, company which has been long-term problematic for the public, went after a recycler [2] and caused him a lot of legal difficulties for refurbishing old systems. Perhaps, he could have avoided the trouble by focusing on Free/Libre, Open Source Software (FLOSS) instead. Maybe not. But either way, the choice of FLOSS would have been better for him and his customers in other ways. Other examples involve the software within ice cream machines and farm equipment and the abuse of the ostensible owners via the proprietary software embedded in the machines. The software in both categories is set up so that the owner of the machines has very little control over the machines themselves, especially in regards to modding or repair, because they have no control at all over the software controlling the machines. Clearly in those categories, the right to repair proponents would benefit from the Four Freedoms. Likewise, the Software Freedom proponents would benefit from being aware of and eliminating the encroachment of malware [3] into devices which never previously had software. /Lars [1] "Let's talk about ice cream and why it matters" https://odysee.com/@rossmanngroup:a/let's-talk-about-ice-cream-and-why-it:a "The REAL Reason McDonalds Ice Cream Machines Are Always Broken" https://youtu.be/SrDEtSlqJC4 (the software part comes in at about half-way and three quarters of the way through the recording) [2] War on Recyclers: "The e-waste warrior, 28,000 copied Windows restore discs, and a fight to stay out of jail: Tech recycler fights" prison term for handing out recovery CDs https://www.theregister.com/2018/02/21/e_waste_lundgren_windows_dell/ https://regmedia.co.uk/2018/02/20/lundgrenappeal.pdf Coverage at Techrights: Part 1: Microsoft’s Legal Attacks on Eric Lundgren Demonstrate There’s No ‘New’ Microsoft Except a Super-Vicious, Law-Twisting Thug http://techrights.org/2019/07/26/story-of-eric-lundgren/ Part 2: Microsoft Windows Puts Recyclers Like Eric Lundgren in Prison and Patients Six Feet Under the Ground http://techrights.org/2019/07/27/microsoft-windows-injustice/ Part 3: Microsoft Put an Innocent, Heroic Man in Prison. Then Microsoft Ran Away. http://techrights.org/2019/08/03/microsoft-vs-heroes/ Part 4: Microsoft Being Microsoft, Bullying Everyone Who Reduces Microsoft’s Profits http://techrights.org/2019/08/04/reducing-microsoft-profits/ Part 5: Microsoft’s War on the Right to Repair (One’s Own Computers) Makes Lundgren an ‘Enemy’ to Microsoft http://techrights.org/2019/08/04/righttorepair/ Part 6: Damage Control Mode: Satya Nadella Fleeing Lundgren After Realising What Microsoft Had Done http://techrights.org/2019/08/05/satya-nadella-fleeing-lundgren/ Part 7: Slander and Libel From Microsoft (Demonising the Victim) http://techrights.org/2019/08/05/satya-nadella-fleeing-lundgren/ Part 8: Similar High-Profile ‘Bargains’ (Aaron Swartz and Marcus Hutchins) http://techrights.org/2019/08/06/fake-bargains/ [3] Proprietary Software Is Often Malware
Overlap between the Software Freedom movement and the Right to Repair?
In what ways, if any, do people consider it feasible for the Right To Repair and Software Freedom groups collaborate on the specific areas where there is overlap? If this has been discussed before please point me to the relevant archives. I've listened to a recent monologue and a short documentary on the Right To Repair [1] and it seems that there is an area of overlap between the Right To Repair movement and the Software Freedom movement. There are, of course, areas where they diverge since they focus mostly on hardware, but where they do overlap, there could be some collaboration because proprietary software is becoming a greater and greater factor inhibiting modding and even basic repair. One example which involves components familiar here is about refurbishing used computers. Some years ago, company which has been long-term problematic for the public, went after a recycler [2] and caused him a lot of legal difficulties for refurbishing old systems. Perhaps, he could have avoided the trouble by focusing on Free/Libre, Open Source Software (FLOSS) instead. Maybe not. But either way, the choice of FLOSS would have been better for him and his customers in other ways. Other examples involve the software within ice cream machines and farm equipment and the abuse of the ostensible owners via the proprietary software embedded in the machines. The software in both categories is set up so that the owner of the machines has very little control over the machines themselves, especially in regards to modding or repair, because they have no control at all over the software controlling the machines. Clearly in those categories, the right to repair proponents would benefit from the Four Freedoms. Likewise, the Software Freedom proponents would benefit from being aware of and eliminating the encroachment of malware [3] into devices which never previously had software. /Lars [1] "Let's talk about ice cream and why it matters" https://odysee.com/@rossmanngroup:a/let's-talk-about-ice-cream-and-why-it:a "The REAL Reason McDonalds Ice Cream Machines Are Always Broken" https://youtu.be/SrDEtSlqJC4 (the software part comes in at about half-way and three quarters of the way through the recording) [2] War on Recyclers: "The e-waste warrior, 28,000 copied Windows restore discs, and a fight to stay out of jail: Tech recycler fights" prison term for handing out recovery CDs https://www.theregister.com/2018/02/21/e_waste_lundgren_windows_dell/ https://regmedia.co.uk/2018/02/20/lundgrenappeal.pdf Coverage at Techrights: Part 1: Microsoft’s Legal Attacks on Eric Lundgren Demonstrate There’s No ‘New’ Microsoft Except a Super-Vicious, Law-Twisting Thug http://techrights.org/2019/07/26/story-of-eric-lundgren/ Part 2: Microsoft Windows Puts Recyclers Like Eric Lundgren in Prison and Patients Six Feet Under the Ground http://techrights.org/2019/07/27/microsoft-windows-injustice/ Part 3: Microsoft Put an Innocent, Heroic Man in Prison. Then Microsoft Ran Away. http://techrights.org/2019/08/03/microsoft-vs-heroes/ Part 4: Microsoft Being Microsoft, Bullying Everyone Who Reduces Microsoft’s Profits http://techrights.org/2019/08/04/reducing-microsoft-profits/ Part 5: Microsoft’s War on the Right to Repair (One’s Own Computers) Makes Lundgren an ‘Enemy’ to Microsoft http://techrights.org/2019/08/04/righttorepair/ Part 6: Damage Control Mode: Satya Nadella Fleeing Lundgren After Realising What Microsoft Had Done http://techrights.org/2019/08/05/satya-nadella-fleeing-lundgren/ Part 7: Slander and Libel From Microsoft (Demonising the Victim) http://techrights.org/2019/08/05/satya-nadella-fleeing-lundgren/ Part 8: Similar High-Profile ‘Bargains’ (Aaron Swartz and Marcus Hutchins) http://techrights.org/2019/08/06/fake-bargains/ [3] Proprietary Software Is Often Malware https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/ ___ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
