[ubuntu-in] Canonical kills free Ubuntu CD program

[Stereotactic]

On 04/07/2011 01:59 PM, Kingsly John wrote:
> +++ Manish Sinha [2011-04-07 13:10:53]:
>
>>> In the long run, it would slowly compromise with the ideals of Debian and
>>> GNU.
>> How? All I find is talk and no evidence. You know when we talk about
>> Free we mean libre and not gratis.
>> Please head to http://gnu.org for more information
> You should probably read things again with an open mind.  Just because this
> is the Ubuntu-IN list doesn't mean we don't have the right to criticize
> things we don't agree with.
>
Couldn't agree more!!
> And while FSF says it is okay to pay for "libre" software, they don't
> advocate paying/using propreitary software.
I think it refers to software as a service. For example, paid support. A 
developer can charge any premium for the same if necessary. But code 
ought to be free (and copyleft). This has huge implications for India 
(and other developing nations) specifically in an era where software 
patents are being used overtly and covertly to lock up in litigations. 
This only raises the cost of development, modifications and spreading 
computing to disadvantaged groups or those affected by digital divide.
> Ubuntu has allowed installing all kinds of non-libre drivers. So they have
> always been divergent from the philosophy of the FSF.
If it helps to integrate in the "mainstream", it's okay. Unfortunately, 
proprietary drivers abound the mainstream (e.g. flash) and thats where 
the big problem is. One can't be exclusivist and neither we can expect 
the ordinary users to be. I think HTML 5 is a big step in this direction 
to get rid of adobe branded crapware for good.
> And Canonical have stated their objective of moving towards "open core" with
> Unity being a first step, which means more proprietary extensions are to be
> expected.lop
>
> And from http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2010/10/17/shuttleworth-admits-it.html
Brilliant write up.
> "Canonical, Ltd. refuses to promise to keep the software copylefted and never
> proprietarize it"
>
> It doesn't matter if they haven't gone/never go proprietary, the very fact
> that they want copyright assignments without giving up their rights to ship
> proprietary/non-libre versions of the software speaks volumes about where
> they stand in terms of their commitment to "libre" software.
Exactly. Unfortunately, certain section of readers are unable to grasp 
this subtle distinction. Thanks for pointing this out :)

The idea behind raking up this issue is that although this group is full 
of smart people but we need to do more instead of cutting each other's 
throat in philosophical banter. Linux offers a reasonable choice of 
distros, their work arounds and a helpful community. However, the 
challanges in India are different. Because of pathetic infrastructure, 
digital divide is a reality that would get worse with time. We can't let 
a corporation get better off by sucking up the free contributions and 
pushing their own version of ecosystem.

This is the point that needs to be addressed.
> Kingsly