Re: FSF continuously harms Free Hardware

[Jacob Hrbek]

For clarification these are schematics of the PowerProgressCommunity 
notebook: 
https://gitlab.com/power-progress-community/oshw-powerpc-notebook/powerpc-laptop-mobo/-/blob/master/PDF_design/PPC_notebook_electrical_schematics_v0.6.pdf

meaning a document containing list of used components (anything on the 
board e.g. resistors, capacitors, etc..) on how they are connected together.

I agree with Leah that schematics are critical for a development of free 
software and i want to highlight that it's not limited only to bios 
development as it affects the development of all free software as a 
whole, but i also want to make the case for gerber files (PCB designs 
used for fabricating) so that the hardware can be fabricated by the user 
while granting them the permission and resources to change the hardware 
as they wish.

For real-life example (price assumption in EUR assuming minimal wage in 
czechia):

Lets assume that i got pinephone by PINE64 or Librem 5 by Purism which 
are using proprietary components filled with (highly likely) spyware.

If i wanted to do something about it then:
1. If the design doesn't provide libre schematics (librem 5 does, 
pinephone doesn't) then i would have to put the PCB under a microscope 
and do a lot of probing and reverse-engineering to understand the design 
and how it works (~700 EUR)
2. engineering to make my own design (400~3000 EUR)
3. Addressing the freedom issues to replace the components with more 
appropriate options (25~800 EUR)
3. prototyping to make sure that my design works (200~5000+ EUR + cost 
of fabricating the PCBs)

or

figure out my own design:
1. Research (2000~5000+ EUR)
2. Development (1000~2000+ EUR)
3. Prototyping (2000~5000+ EUR)

And in case of pinephone i can't even publish the improved design 
without violating copyright.

And even though that both phones are advertised as Free and Open-Source 
(librem 5 with FSF's endorsement) and there is a development of free 
software.. I can't really use whatever i want on it i am forced to use 
only software that the manufacturer wants me to run in a way that they 
want with built-in spyware that i can't remove without going through the 
process above which doesn't feel like freedom to me and also this whole 
situation blocking further development of free software on handheld devices.

So if FSF took a stronger stand on Free Hardware Designs then I highly 
doubt that both PINE64 and Purism would be able to afford using 
proprietary hardware designs model which would allow everyone to skip on 
majority of the development cost and contribute to address these freedom 
issues in a way that is truly free while being able to develop a free 
software for it without restrictions.

---

I want to clarify the use of proprietary chips:

I recognize that they are a freedom issue on their own, but i don't see 
that being a freedom issue with free hardware designs as that problem is 
self-correcting by (as said above) skipping on majority of the 
development cost and being able to replace them with more appropriate 
chip where we don't have this option if the schematics and gerber files 
are not available under freedom respecting license.

That said I would be against certifying those designs as long as they 
use non-free components.

---

> Would you like to set up s project to do this?  You know more than
they know about this task, and maybe you have time to do it. -- RMS

I would be happy to contribute to RYF with certification process and 
moderation of Free Hardware Designs and contributing to h-node if the 
requested option for hardware freedom was added.

If you consider making a GPLv4 (as suggested by reprap developers in 
provided forum post which reasoning i do support) to include the 
critical clauses about Free Hardware Designs ("FHD") to reduce the 
amount of proprietary forks of FHD (highlighted case of RepRap Mendel) 
then i would also be happy to share my opinions and suggestions to it.

On 1/24/22 05:33, Richard Stallman wrote:
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>    > Does it provide gerber (file that contains the PCB design and is used
>    > for manufacturing), schematics (file providing wiring of the components)
>    > and models for the chasis (e.g. STL files to fabricate the chasis on
>    > e.g. 3D printer) under GPLv3-complying license?
>    > - Yes -> Certify it as Free Hardware Design
>    > - No -> Don't certify it
>
> I understand those words partially.  "Wiring of the components" --
> what are "components" in this case?  Does "components" mean "chips"?
> If not, the hardware will, in most cases, still contain secret
> circuitry--inside the chips.
>
> The FSF group that handles much more than this
> is short-handed and behind on its work.  I couldn't
> suggest that they start anything new.
>
> Would you like to set up s project to do this?  You know more than
> they know about this task, and maybe you have time to do it.
>
>    > Alternatively worst case scenario that takes the least amount of
>    > resources that i can think of would be to rename "Respects your Freedom"
>    > to "Respects Software Freedom" so that it's not taken as FSF endorsing
>    > proprietary hardware development.
>
> RYF deserves its name.  It checks for the freedom that users of the
> computer can take advantage of, today and in the near future.
> Having those circuit diagrams will not affect the freedom of customers
> who buy the hardware.
>
> Free hardware designs are desirable, and may be necessary in a
> possible distant future, but not very soon.
>
> --
> Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
> Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
> Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
> Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
--
Jacob Hrbek

publickey - kreyren@rixotstudio.cz - 1677db82.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature