[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
In my view, the idea of "free hardware" is not a good concept. The distinction between free and nonfree software is crucially about whether users can change it. But most changes in hardware are impossible. I don't think that distinction makes sense for physical pieces of hardware. Rather, it makes sense for hardware _designs_. https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html states our reasons for this position. I wish you agreed with us, but we can live with your disagreement. Yes, we certify hardware whose designs are not free. There is no reason to be more strict than that -- and it would make the certification program almost a no-op. > The GPLv3 even when used in good faith by hardware developers such as > https://github.com/Creality3DPrinting/Ender-3 is legally problematic as > it's referring to the copyrighted material as "software". Our lawyer assured me that that is not an obstacle to using GPL 3 for other kinds of works. And publishing proprietary modified versions would violate the license. -- Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org) Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org) _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
