Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 09:18:59 JST Matthew Garrett

   It's taken a while for me to figure out why https://www.fsf.org/news/anchoring-the-fsf-in-its-values bothered me so much, and in the end I think it's that the FSF doesn't recognise its unique position in the free software community. Sure, if people sufficiently disagree with the FSF they could start up their own foundation - but the FSF has unique control over the GPL, one of the bedrocks of free software

   • Embed this notice
     sjvn (sjvn@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 09:18:50 JST sjvn

     in reply to

     @mjg59 The simple fact that they've enabled RMS for so many years has long bothered me. Yes, he had a couple of great ideas that were seminal for free software and open source. But, he's also dragged the FSF into the mud.

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 09:18:53 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     I think it's fine for an organisation to making it hard to be subject to ideological takeover, but if that organisation has power nobody else does then what next? We're asserting that the current FSF voting members have an insight into free software that nobody else does, and this doesn't feel great

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 09:18:56 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     The FSF asserts it's staying true to its original goals through strict control of who can become a board member, but what if they're wrong on something? What if the board refuses to recognise something fundamental? There's no clear avenue to engage with the board to change their mind, there's no way to become elected to the board to work from within. Someone could start a competitor but the FSF own the copyright to GNU and (more importantly) they own the GPL family of licenses.

   • Embed this notice
     jwz (jwz@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 09:31:08 JST jwz

     in reply to

     @mjg59 Bring back dueling

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 09:31:14 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     Maybe the FSF needs the equivalent of a constitutional convention every few years

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 09:31:19 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     (We'll ignore that a bunch of the board use MacOS)

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 20:05:01 JST 翠星石

     in reply to
     @mjg59 GNU holds the copyright to GNU.
     
     Copyright is not owned, otherwise it would never expire.
     
     The copyright assignments are on terms that only allow relicensing to better free software.
     
     Future GPL versions can only be similar in spirit and correct found issues and concerns.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 20:05:14 JST 翠星石

     in reply to
     @mjg59 Which board members use macos?
   • Embed this notice
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) (taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 20:14:47 JST Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @Suiseiseki @mjg59
     
     There isn't an official entity called GNU, is there? I mean, no such legal person who could hold copyright.
     
     Pretty sure the copyright assignment is made to the FSF when you contribute to various GNU projects, though not all.
     
     I'm indifferent to this practice. Seems to me like the important thing is using a good license, and it's not clear to me what benefit there is to the FSF holding copyright, but I don't mind it, either.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 20:21:28 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     @taylan @mjg59 The copyright assignment is made to the FSF, which is pretty much GNU.
     
     The benefit is that the FSF is in a much better position to enforce the licenses and can register the copyright and can re-license if needed to enhance freedom (FSF tends to hold all or most of the copyright, so it's actually possible to ask the few people who didn't assign).
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) and Alexandre Oliva like this.