-------- Original Message -------- From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net Apparently from: arm-netbook-bounces@lists.phcomp.co.uk To: Eco-Conscious Computing arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] firefly 3399 all source software disclosed? Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 06:01:54 +0100
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 10:07 PM, ronwirring@safe-mail.net wrote:
In a previous post, lkcl wrote the firefly rk3399 staff has the pcb cad files and he had no objection about firefly rejecting, which they have done towards me, to email the cad files.
aiyaaa, you didn't ask them did you? it's their proprietary and confidential business, and they're most likely under NDA with rockchip - please don't do that, ron.
About lkcl's crowd funding, the mali gpu source code is not available. Lkcl can make the mali gpu source code not available, because he makes a reservation in the text in his ad.
this is a rather confusing sentence-construction... ad... ad... ah, you may be referring to the crowd-funding text as "advertising". that word is reserved for businesses. this is *not* a business.
About the pcb cad files, lkcl has decided they will not be available until lkcl decides to provide them.
noooo, ron, most of the CAD files *are* available. the only ones that are not are the EOMA68-A20 ones because i've invested literally tens of thousands of dollars in their development, and if someone else goes and clones them (particularly in china) before the project's properly established it jeapordises the ENTIRE PROJECT. especially if they fuck it up and get it wrong.
I understand your arguments and why you made the decision. I was pointing out, that proper open source reasoning, in my opinion, would require that all data is provided.
I disagree on the decision.
tough.
Being open source I find it implicit that all data will be provided immediately.
normally i would agree with you 100%. and in the case of the housings those *are* 100% available.
however in the case of the A20 PCB i have to make an exception to not make them available *IMMEDIATELY*.
let me be clear. they WILL be made available. is that clear?
Because lkcl has made a reservation in his ad
there is no advertising, ron. advertising is a tool utilised by businesses. this is not a business.
I have reflected on that. What I write now is not directed against you or your crowd funding. It is in general about crowd funding. It seems crowd funding is some form of workaround about buying an item. I have no knowledge about court decisions in this field. I could imagine due to consumer law, a court would rule it a common purchase. Meaning consumer rights would apply.
about the cad files in question he can make that choice.
In the firefly rk3399' ad it says, the hardware is open source.
that means that the software is available under libre licenses. it does not mean that the *CAD* files for the *hardware* are available.
The ad is misleading and deceptive.
ron, i do notice that you are often confused by the use of words that potentially have multiple meanings, or that you sometimes cross-associate words.
in this case however you would be correct, there is the possibility of thinking that "open source" applies *to* the hardware CAD files.
however if they meant that, they would have used the words "open hardware" or "libre hardware".
I disagree. Firefly writes "open source hardware platform". I find my interpretation legitimate. You are not backing up your interpretation with arguments. My argument is, they say it is open source. Then everything has to be open source if no reservations are stated.
it's a common enough mistake.
I have found no reservations about the mali gpu source code or the pcb cad files. Firefly can probably not email the mali gpu source code, because they do not have it.
that's correct. you'd be asking them for something they don't have, and are not legally obligated to provide even if they did.
That is debatable.
They can email the pcb cad files because they have them.
ron: they are in absolutely no way obligated to you to provide them. they've used the right words, and it is *you* who is confused by their choice of words.
Again debatable.
That is why I am going to demand both the mali gpu source code and the pcb cad files from firefly.
ron please don't do that. you will only harm the reputation of the free software community by doing so.
I do not believe playing nice with the manufacturers will show a great rate of successes. Rather if big numbers of people would coordinated act like I do, some impact might show. There is no reason to not try both path simultaneous. Some people play nice. Other make demands.
If firefly does not provide the data in question, then I will file a complaint to kickstarter. It is unacceptable calling something open source, if it is not all open source.
that's down to confusion on your part about wording, and it is their choice and right as a proprietary business what they choose to release and do not choose to release.
you have *no right* to tell them that they *have* to release the source code. that is down to them to learn the consequences of their decisions.
Of cource I will not mention lkcl in any form.
don't do it, ron. you'll cause damage to the reputation of the entire free software community, lessening the chances of companies like Acer from wanting to work with us.
You have a tendency to magnify the impact of one persons actions. Do you actually believe, that me writing manufacturers and making demands, right or wrong demands, has any impact on the situation of libre software? Do you think acer in any way takes notice? No. If half a million people in a short period of time hammered acer with demands, then there might be some impact.
Previously you told me, that putting pressure on manufacturers should be done. Then I discarded what you said. I have reached to another point of view. Maybe coordinated campaigns, which are not being done now, might show some results. It can mobilize libre software people. Getting the power to have a say against manufacturers.
l.
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk
On 5/31/17, ronwirring@safe-mail.net ronwirring@safe-mail.net wrote:
You have a tendency to magnify the impact of one persons actions. Do you actually believe, that me writing manufacturers and making demands, right or wrong demands, has any impact on the situation of libre software? Do you think acer in any way takes notice? No. If half a million people in a short period of time hammered acer with demands, then there might be some impact.
Previously you told me, that putting pressure on manufacturers should be done. Then I discarded what you said. I have reached to another point of view. Maybe coordinated campaigns, which are not being done now, might show some results. It can mobilize libre software people. Getting the power to have a say against manufacturers.
The best way to approach the issue is as a partner, not as a client. There are people that go through the support channels with unreasonable demands or QA-failure related complaints magnifying them to ridiculous proportions.
When using support channels to address a legitimate ethical concern, one will only look like one of those unreasonable customers.
I'm going to agree that going through the support channels will get you nowhere. You want to talk to management, way up management like Product Manager or CEO. Otherwise PR will ignore you and if you sue their suits will bury you in delays.
On 1 June 2017 02:14:25 GMT+03:00, John Luke Gibson eaterjolly@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/31/17, ronwirring@safe-mail.net ronwirring@safe-mail.net wrote:
You have a tendency to magnify the impact of one persons actions. Do you actually believe, that me writing manufacturers and making demands, right or wrong demands, has any impact on the situation of libre software? Do you think acer in any way takes notice? No. If half a million people in a short period of time hammered acer with demands, then there might be some impact.
Previously you told me, that putting pressure on manufacturers should be done. Then I discarded what you said. I have reached to another point of view. Maybe coordinated campaigns, which are not being done now,
might
show some results. It can mobilize libre software people. Getting the power to have a say against manufacturers.
The best way to approach the issue is as a partner, not as a client. There are people that go through the support channels with unreasonable demands or QA-failure related complaints magnifying them to ridiculous proportions.
When using support channels to address a legitimate ethical concern, one will only look like one of those unreasonable customers.
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk
arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
-
Allan Mwenda -
John Luke Gibson -
ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net