Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

[max bianco]

On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Les <hlhowell at pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>  On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 13:45 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  >   Why should I be interested in a distribution that makes it
>  > difficult
>  > for me to make my own choices about whether a license is acceptable
>  > or
>  > not? I don't have a problem with downloading my own copy of any
>  > particular code from any particular place under any conditions that I
>  > find acceptable.
>  But that is the problem.  The folks with proprietary want to limit your
>  use to only the systems they have chosen to support, thus you can end up
>  with instruments or software that you have purchased that will not run
>  when the OS changes.  Furthermore their licenses forbid you from reverse
>  engineering the code to figure out how to make it work some where else,
>  and the owner of the proprietary OS won't let you do any reverse
>  engineering legally to figure out how to interface to the software or
>  hardware he/she/it chooses to no longer support.  Thus you are obsoleted
>  with no legal recourse.  Those lovely sites where you download such
>  utilities are often legally not clean to use either, depending upon the
>  laws that the various entities have seen fit to pass.  Finally your own
>  documents, code and other encoded data may be unaccessable to you
>  either, because the formatting, encoding, encryption or compression may
>  be proprietary and non disclosed with the attendant no reverse
>  engineering clauses, leaving you without access even to your own
>  material.
>
>  That is why these licenses, and the subject of libre or free software is
>  important.
>
>  Regards,
>  Les H
>
>
Adobe Flash is something I can't for the life of me figure out why
anyone would use. You can't kill the adds like you can with gnash and
it leaves a gaping security hole in everything it touches.
Max