> The best way to create GNU OS is for an existing free distribution to > give its copyright ownership to the FSF and change its brand to GNU.
Seems pointless or impossible when most software in a distribution isn't copyrighted by its developers (it distributes software written by others). > Giving copyright ownership to the FSF will ensure that GNU OS will > always be free. Licenses like the GNU GPL are designed to do this, even if the copyright holder later decides to make newer versions nonfree (if there are multiple independent significant copyright holders then it might be difficult to get their permission to make a nonfree derived work). > GNOME started out with the freedom mindset, but has > become open source, even though it is supposed to be a GNU > project. The FSF cannot fix GNOME because, as far as I understand, it > does not own the GNOME copyright. Explain how copyright assignment could help in such a case. (It's interesting for me as a contributor to a different non-FSF-assigned GNU package.) > Trisquel seems to be the prime candidate to morph into GNU OS, because > it is used by the FSF. They also use other distros for significantly different uses, like gNewSense or LibreWRT. How would Trisquel replace them?
pgpPCUS5dLjfR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
