[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] ethical edtech edit-a-thon

From: Leah Rowe
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] ethical edtech edit-a-thon
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 07:48:24 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

i like this iniative too. as someone who regularly has to help people in
education (I sell a lot of freedom laptops to people in education: both
students and teachers) I get questions about education software a lot.

kudos to you for setting up this directory.

On 30/03/2019 20:04, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> Em 11/03/2019 20:18, Erin Glass escreveu:
>> I'm writing to let you know about the 'Ethical Ed Tech
>> <>' wiki and
>> edit-a-thon on April 3 that may be of interest to the free software
>> community.
> Nice initiative indeed. Awesome! :D
> As for the definitions of free/libre software and the other one, open
> source, I think that the graph and explanation in [1] and [2] provide
> insights on when those differ. The page in [2] does a wonderful job on
> explaining in abstract what I'll say in this message, Besides, in the
> field of *strategies* or *tactics* as to how to foster or advance
> software freedom, the two groups also differ strongly, as can be seen in
> various works such as [3][4][5][6]. Particularly, [6] explains why you
> might see some people debating or advocating for stronger and auto
> upgradable copyleft licenses such as AGPL-3.0-or-later for every kind of
> work.
> Technically, free/libre software activists and open source proponents
> can work together in a given project, but they'll mostly disagree in
> regards to which aspects to priorize in the balance between freedom of
> the software for the very-end-user vs. other characteristic (e.g.: ease
> of use, graphical friendliness, speed, adoption by other people).
> In practice, Open Source Initiative's definition of open source seems to
> enable works with digital handcuffs to fit in nicely to that category.
> These handcuffs are ways that the copyright holders found to go beyond
> the copyright law so as to take some already-given freedoms of the
> software away from the very-end-user, measure also known for being
> para-copyright[7]. Thus, the non-compliants can take a GPL-2.0-only work
> and make derivated works that are distributed as cryptographically
> signed execuables in smartphones/tablets and even in the engine control
> units that decide how a car will develop/work while being driven, in
> devices or vehicles that do signature checks to see if the cryptographic
> keys and the binary/executable match.
> This is such a problem that there are people in the free/libre software
> movement advocating for the use of strong and auto upgradable copyleft
> licenses (the AGPL-3.0-or-later comes to mind).
> Trademarks (simply put: the registered logos and friendly names that
> appear everywhere) are also accepted in the free/libre software movement
> as long as the trademark *policies* don't take away the essential
> freedoms of the software. Patents (which describe how to do something in
> detail) are also accepted to some extent, with the advantage that the
> GPL-3.0-or-later and AGPL-3.0-or-later provide better legal provisions
> in favor of both the original copyright holders and the very-end-users[8].
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]
> [4]
> [5]
> [6]
> [7]
> [8]
> [9]
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list

Leah Rowe

Libreboot developer and project founder.

Use free software. Free as in freedom.

Use a free BIOS -
Use a free operating system, GNU+Linux.

Support computer user freedom -

Minifree Ltd, trading as Ministry of Freedom | Registered in England,
No. 9361826 | VAT No. GB202190462
Registered Office: 19 Hilton Road, Canvey Island, Essex SS8 9QA, UK |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]