With regards to BSD-3-Clause-Clear and BSD-2-Clause-FreeBSD vs. GPL (and variants), the latest version and "or-later" option of the latter allows a chance to transfer the freedoms of the software to the end-users' copy (it's not a perfect ingredient, because it depends on the rights holder to enforce it but it's the necessary condition) while the former (the BSD-likes) are too lax (the moment the rights holder decides to do something, the person already lost the legal mechanisms that would allow per to influence the derivative project's decision to guarantee that end-users have their software freedom kept with the copy of the software they have). Of course, this influence is best exercised with collaboration for license compliance, and commitment from the non-compliant to fix the issues. Besides, without the right amount of regulation market moves faster than sustainability, and the permissive nature of the first two licenses mentioned make a perfect tool for opportunistic competitive behavior, in a century and with goods where/which we can't spend time with Porterism nor with Social Darwinisms.
As for the attempt to apply the same comparison to the possibility of a microcode update: I guess it can be considered a matter of where one wants to go. I see various projects which have some product which is free/libre software, but have alternative products (from the same origin) which do the same thing but which aren't free/libre, so for those origins/projects I consider them a kind of "desperate attempt to 'reach out' to other people", even if it means not following the free/libre software philosophy. Finally, I tend to not follow these projects, nor recommend their free/libre products, because I find these misleading. 2018-01-11T13:45:32-0600 Katherine Cox-Buday wrote: > I really appreciate the viewpoints expressed here, thank you. It's a > great reminder that software freedom doesn't exist in a vacuum, and that > its intent is to do good. It's worth considering what that means in a > more global context. > > > I've been reading up on the philosophical differences between BSD and > GNU licenses, and one of the points that's often made is that BSD is the > freer of the two -- allowing users to do as they please -- but GNU > expresses the most freedom globally and is therefore more ethical. > > It is a fun thought experiment to extrapolate and apply the same logic > to this situation: what would express the most freedom globally: > faithfully applying the GPL, or assisting users with securing their > computing environments. > > Please note that I'm advocating any approach; only having a nice > discussion with like-minded folks. -- - https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno - Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com gratis). - "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo. - Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard - Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV. - Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.
