> I cannot see how FSF doesn't enable you to use any terms you wish and -- Louis
Explained in previous e-mail, let me know if i missed anything and i will elaborate. > What I suggest to you is that you start re-defining, defining, re-thinking and fixing very good all the legal issues by using legal assistance, attorneys, advisors, various assistants or foundations and organizations which support the cause. -- Louis While i argue that the GPLv3 is not an option for Hardware freedom, this is not the main issue as FSF still remains authority on User Freedom and have a major impact on Hardware Freedom as explained in previous e-mail. The only relevant organizations that i am aware of for this are: - OSHW who are seemingly not aligned with FSF values - FSFE who are already supporting hardware freedom with e.g. https://fsfe.org/activities/routers/routers.en.html, but lack the influence past FSF on the subject. > Right now, it seem like you are confused, n ot me. You speak of free software license that should relate to hardware. But it is not meant for hardware. -- Louis Confusion is always a possibility, but i believe that i said that GPLv3 is being widely used for hardware development by FSF supporters and members e.g. the mentioned RepRap developers who discussed GPLv4 that i would support to include hardware freedom. On 1/31/22 20:14, Jean Louis wrote:
* Jacob Hrbek <[email protected]> [2022-01-31 17:52]:I agree that this is a problem, but as presented FSF doesn't enable us to use other terms as it's too software-oriented so this is the best we can do even when the hardware is released under GPLv3.I cannot see how FSF doesn't enable you to use any terms you wish and want. Purpose of FSF is distributing free software, campaigning for it. How is that disabling you to use any kind of language or terms in your life or your activities? And I cannot see how is hardware related t
o GPLv3, as it is software
license related to copyrights. Now you say it is related to hardware. When RMS designed GPL he was not alone in writing those texts. It requires serious legal qualifications, skills and experience. To design a long lasting copyright license for software requires bunch of efforts. What I suggest to you is that you start re-defining, defining, re-thinking and fixing very good all the legal issues by using legal assistance, attorneys, advisors, various assistants or foundations and organizations which support the cause. Right now, it seem like you are confused, not me. You speak of free software license that should relate to hardware. But it is not meant for hardware. I do understand what you want with the hardware, but you should not mix the terms. -- Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https:
//stallmansupport.org/ -- Jacob Hrbek, In support of ukraine sovereignty #supportUkraine
publickey - [email protected] - 1677db82.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
