[Linux-aus] Linux Australia values statement

[Peter Miller]

On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 08:15 +1000, Mike Carden wrote:
> Open Technology
> 
> The foundations of Linux Australia are in all facets of open
> technology. By this we mean openness in source code, standards,
> formats, licences and APIs. Whether for software sources, documents,
> hardware designs, images, works of art etc, we value the use of open
> licenses to promote the creative reuse of intellectual effort.
> 
> Open source makes code available to everyone to study, modify,
> repurpose and redistribute. We value the innovation made possible by
> the sharing of openly licensed intellectual effort. 

+1 for Free Software inclusive wording.

Many of us dinosaurs member a time when computer vendors actively and
unashamedly strove for "vendor lock-in", ensuring that customers
*couldn't* go elsewhere.  The "Free as in Freedom" aspect has many of it
roots there, in a customer back-lash to a very flawed marketing idea.
But bad memes don't go away, and now we see things like Tivo, and
numerous examples of "tivo-isation", and cryptographically signed
firmware, which are just a modern spin on "vendor lock-in".  Other
examples include cryptographically signed consumables (e.g. printer
cartridges) to ensure you can't fill them up again with generic ink, and
making generic after-market substitutes impossible.

I think this section needs to also address the fact that we promote the
idea that the consumer owns her hardware, and may do with it as she
pleases (including run software the vendor didn't anticipate, or even
like); that the consumer owns her music, and may consume it any way she
pleases (including in ways the vendor didn't anticipate, or like, and
for no extra fee); that the consumer owns her videos, and may consume
them any way she pleases.  (Carefully dancing around the redistribution
snake pit.)

Vendor lock-in also applies to some of the attempts to corral the
Internet, in the guise of "quality of service".

Also, I have noticed a rising number of references to "Free as in
Market" meaning that some forms of regulation (such as monopoly powers,
including copyright and patents) are outright harmful to consumers (most
immediately) and the economy in general.  Vendor lock-in is, of course,
anti-free-as-in-market. 

Should this section also mention other anti-consumer things, like CSS
and  TPMs and market segmentation mechanisms?

-- 
Peter Miller <peter.miller.aus at gmail.com>