Re: Is lack of software freedom a valid reason for refusal?

[Paul Sutton]

On 22/09/17 21:24, Jonas Oberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> So the unemployment office would eventually resort to
>> offering you one of those
> 
> I think it's important to differentiate between on the one hand the ethical 
> question, and on the other hand the practical question of how unemployment 
> benefits would vary.
> 
> The latter would be different between countries, and individuals (some may 
> have additional unemployment benefits privately, through their unions or 
> similar).
> 
> So I'm not sure how useful it is to compare :-)
> Jonas Öberg
> Free Software Foundation Europe | jo...@fsfe.org
> Your support enables our work (fsfe.org/join)


I think one of the points that is made here,  is that change comes from
within,  sure you can apply for a job where the company is using
non-free software.  Once in you can suggest change and ideas.  A new
tool chain or how they can benefit from releasing software under a gpl
or similar license, but still make money from support and with help from
the fsfe cite some good examples of who has made a success from doing that.

It could be that the reason there is no Linux version is that there is
no one to help develop it,  which you could end up as project lead.

Paul


> ___
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
> https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> 

-- 
http://www.zleap.net
diaspora : zl...@joindiaspora.com
Torbay Tech Jam http://torbaytechjam.org.uk
Next Tech jam 2nd Saturday of the month
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

[UK] Information about the think tank Doteveryone

[Mat Witts]

I presume they have to be 'supportive' in some way - which could mean a
donation or something else - like a commitment to promoting FS I would
assume - but I don't know

DOTEVERYONE is a trading name of GO ON UK LTD.

The newly incorporated DOTEVERYONE is now a dissolved company.

The older company, GO ON UK is a registered Charity, two of their
websites (digitalskills.com and go-on.co.uk) weren't responding when I
looked today and their latest accounts highlight two risks about
'organizational capacity' and 'financial stability' which again, because
I don't know the conditions of being added, don't know if that's
relevant here.

It's certainly interesting to learn that the bulk of the money (approx.
1.2M a year) has been pledged by companies not known for their sympathy
towards free software AFAIK including E ON (Energy), EE (Telecomms),
Lloyds Bank, Sage (software) and Talk Talk (telecomms).

Their accounts don't mention FS anywhere as far as I can see... they
don't seem to know much about FS and don't talk of it's importance in
any of their materials... which is not to say they wouldn't if they were
educated since they do seem well intentioned, fairly well resourced and
well connected.

The bulk of the expenses seems to go on wages, consultants, web costs
and other things which doesn't impress me much though.

I have worked in UK third sector for 15 years and the variability in
quality in UK charities is hard to overestimate and the regulator is
seen as being quite weak and ineffective.

Any UK registered charity would fit the broader category description of
'NGO'. What a 'true' NGO 'like the other organisations on our list'
means I am not sure.

SUMMARY IMO: I don't know the terms /conditions of entry to the list so
can't make a judgment. The company are having quite a few teething
problems... which I think is because it's rather unfocused aims and
objectives and (ironically) for an organization promoting digital
competence - it doesn't seem to have demonstrated much of that so far...
e.g. it has 'frozen' some of it's operations because it's uncertain
about the 'viability of the platform'.

They do not seem to be oriented towards FS so far, but you may still
want to add them for other reasons... e.g. FSFE might be able to
influence them into talking more about FS in their events?

/ mat
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: FSFE launches a new campaign today: Public Money? Public Code!

[Fabian Keil]

Erik Albers  wrote:

> Now it is up to you! Please help and join us by signing this letter and ask
> your friends and colleagues to do likewise:
> 
>   https://publiccode.eu/#action

There may be license issue due to resources like:
https://publiccode.eu/css/bootstrap.min.css

They contain a "Licensed under MIT
(https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/master/LICENSE)"
comment but not the license text itself.

Probably the issue is inherited from upstream and presumably
upstream doesn't care too much about license compliance
but for an FSFE website this situation doesn't seem ideal.

Fabian


pgp4MeEUs4aof.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: Is lack of software freedom a valid reason for refusal?

[Florian Snow]

Hi Jonas,


Jonas Oberg  writes:
> No one should be able to fault someone else for not following the same
> moral compass as someone else.

You are talking about this specific issue though, aren't you?

Happy hacking!
Florian
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: Is lack of software freedom a valid reason for refusal?

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

I would go for the following:

For the job, if the job *doesn't* require adapting or making a software
(probably a non-free one), I would accept it, would work for some time,
then slowly spread the free/libre software philosophy in the workplace
(I would do so through civilized conversations and formal process). If
some outsider asks what you're doing there: tell that, besides being
employed to do what you're doing there, you're also responsible for
convincing the organization to use, adapt, require and provide
free/libre software --- in case the organization does all these things,
but with non-free software --- and also tell that this is somewhat slow
process which also deals with people's biased mindsets (which is
true). If you get fired and people ask why, tell them that the
organization failed to do what was suggested and that their negligence
made the collaboration impossible.

Before the process of making the suggestion to the organization, it's a
good idea to conduct research on what are their needs in regards to the
software functionalities ([1][9]). And if some free/libre software lacks
such, help this software by either hiring someone to make it that way
and upstream changes, or also do it yourself --- if you do know how
to. This is why the money you get from the job is important. However, it
must be noted that I said "functionalities", so this doesn't involve
asking the organization "which license is preferred?", because they'll
probably make biased arguments towards permissive/lax/non-copyleft
(e.g.: "MIT" (Expat or X11?), BSDs), weak copyleft (e.g.: GNU LGPL) or
out-of-date strong copyleft licenses (e.g.: any GNU AGPL/GPL that isn't
equal to "3+"/"version 3 'or later'"). We must get GNU AGPL 3+ ("3 'or
later'") in all the things now, both to avoid SaaSS and digital
handcuffs, besides individually-held copyright assignments and
community-oriented copyleft enforcement ([2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]). ;)

At least in hostile environments, it's best to start aiming for 1% of
free/libre software there, than aim immediatelly high (100%) ([1]).

As for jobs where you would be paid to make non-free software or adapt
some software in order to make a non-free one --- these two also include
webpages that have JavaScript code, because this one is *client-side*,
for more information see the GNU LibreJS ([10]) project and FSF's FreeJS
campaign ([11]) ---, in the moment of signing the employement contract
--- or if not "sigining": accepting it verbally ---, make use of the
ContractPatch ([12]) *before* accepting/signing the contract. While you
have the unsigned contract on your hands, consider consulting a lawyer
--- paid or /pro bono/ --- and also making meetings involving the lawyer
and employer to reduce the gap in bargaining power ([1]). If the
employer denies, refuse the contract.

In both cases (direct software development and not), look out for
contract terminology such as "ownership", "invention", "copyright",
"intelectual property", "confidentiality", "conflict of interest" ([1]).

As for what programs are used during work, you can talk to the cowerks
or direct supervisors to get the real information on whether any
software is allowed, rather than the head CTO ([1]). Formal culture is
different from informal. Besides, if the organization has the "Bring
Your Own Devices" policy, then you can argue that in the same way that
the current employees are able to bring their own non-free software and
"feel satisfied", then the employer shouldn't discriminate against you
bringing free/libre software to make your work ([1]).

About the requirement to use non-free software in order to pay for
parking cars, perhaps writing free/libre software replacement for this
is another good use of the money one gets from the jobs. It's also
possible to take public transportation or even asking someone who also
goes in the same direction as you to take you there --- or to some part
of the path. I don't know if the city were you live requires the same
payment for parking bicycles, but you could also think of the
possibility of using these, and also of using skateboards and roller
skates, instead of the polluting and space-consuming ones (e.g.: cars,
motorcycles, trucks, SUVs).

Finally, discrimination against us free/libre software activists seem to
be common nowadays, including here in Brazil, Latin America. I wonder if
there is a formal organization with which we can talk to and say "hey!
we exist, and most employers don't seem to care"? ;)

[1] 

(CC BY-SA 4.0).

[2] 

 (CC BY-SA 4.0).

[3] 

 (CC BY-SA 4.0).

[4]  (CC BY-SA 
4.0).

[5] 

Re: Is lack of software freedom a valid reason for refusal?

[Theo Schmidt]

Am 22.09.2017 um 07:12 schrieb Carsten Agger:
...
> * I want to park my car in the city, but it's only possible to pay by
> downloading one of two proprietary apps (real-world situation in
> Copenhagen) on my smartphone. Can I refuse to pay an eventual fine on
> the grounds that I couldn't pay?

This sort of thing is becoming more and more evident and it angers me no
end. The problem is that there are almost no true politically controlled
public-service organisations any more like there used to be, they are at
best now publicly owned, but managed like private companies.

Therefore they do what they want and are under no legal obligation to
serve the public. Most countries have in this way privatized their Post
Offices including Girobanks, telephone companies, power and water
utilities, radio and TV stations.

I expect that this sort of thing will become the norm in this
increasingly neoliberal world, as in this aspect even social democrats
and greens follow the mainstream, and I guess there is nothing we can do
about it except vote extreme left, (or maybe some cases extreme right),
or if available the Pirate Party. And of course COMPLAIN COMPLAIN
COMPLAIN! Or drop out!

Regards, Theo
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: Is lack of software freedom a valid reason for refusal?

[Jonas Oberg]

Hi Carsten,

>I imagine a number of situations:

I don't think there's a universal answer for this. It's a choice individuals 
need to make, taking into consideration the consequences it leads to. It's not 
dissimilar to the situation described here:

http://news.psu.edu/story/388899/2016/01/25/academics/ask-ethicist-can-i-turn-down-work-assignment-goes-against-my

The ethicist answering that question doesn't go into much detail but I believe 
the conclusion is a reasonable one:

"If you decline the assignment, you will need to accept any career consequences 
that you face, but you should have confidence because you stood up for what you 
believed in, and likely, you will gain the respect of your peers for taking a 
stand. Your career will be long, and you may face similar decisions at times. 
Deciding what you believe in and what you are willing to compromise on early 
will allow you to live with integrity."

Those consequences can be dire and include the loss of unemployment benefits in 
countries not recognizing your moral beliefs as a reason to reject employments. 
But the question is not easy: you have also been trained, potentially hired, 
for a particular job, and the employer has, and likely should have, a 
significant power to direct the work you do for the benefit of the 
organisation. Even if this means using proprietary software.

But the risk you then face is that of risking your employment. If you're a 
midwife refusing to carry out abortions out of your moral beliefs, you can not, 
and should not, be allowed to work in public health care, as the employer must 
be able to direct you to carry out an abortion.

What is important to me though is the recognition that there are highly 
individual answers to this. No one should be able to fault someone else for not 
following the same moral compass as someone else.


Jonas Öberg
Free Software Foundation Europe | jo...@fsfe.org
Your support enables our work (fsfe.org/join)
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Freelance web development

[Andreas Nilsson]

Hello FSFE

I am a web developer with two years experience in NodeJS and MongoDB looking 
for a free software job I can do in place in the company I work as a consultant 
job. Can anyone help me?

Kind regards
Andreas
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion