Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations
----- "Pierre Habouzit" <email@example.com> wrote:
> It's not, and that's exactly Marc's point, the difference between
> non-free and Debian will be blurry (if it's not already blurry enough),
> and every single User will have non-free, whereas I believe quite a few
> live without it right now.
> That's regression, and it's IMHO far worse than a couple of binary
> blobs in Linux.
What we really need is a way to continue having non-free be easy to install but have the user be aware of the fact that their system is partially non-free but not in a way that "irritates" them about it. We need to follow that up with some kind of web based resource that helps the user figure out "you bought this thing with non-free firmware, you should have bought this thing that is free and close to the same price". By marketing (a dirty word in these circles) a non-free "lifestyle" we can help influence the purchases of users and incentivise manufacturers to move towards more open and customer-centric production practices.
If you think of Ubuntu and Debian as more aligned than enemies (which they are) then the idea that we can bring significant influence against manufacturers is not crazy. This would be even more true if we were more aggressively pursuing activities like a Debian certified product database. Some of that is present today on the Debian Hardware Wiki but we don't currently push that to the forefront and use our most trafficked pages to aggressively push hardware that makes it easy for us to execute the obligations of the Social Contract.
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
firstname.lastname@example.org - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315