Microblog
in reply to @ 2015-344 20:12 UTCIt is my understanding that if you build a kernel without this firmware (such as linux-libre) you should be fine on that front.
in reply to @ 2015-344 13:16 UTC"free as in speech" doesn't mean no charge but rather "free as in freedom" as in libre as in liberty.
in reply to @ 2015-344 13:10 UTCIf you get the version with wifi/bluetooth they require blobs. The FSF talks about iMX.6 on a different page I think and how the video codec coprocessor requires a blob, but you don't need to use that. It's the same SoC as Novena.
in reply to @ 2015-344 03:56 UTCHummingboard — free GPU drivers are getting more usable all the time.
in reply to @ 2015-343 15:49 UTCI am going to go through and comment on the ones that are not theirs directing people to the official release
That is the best solution
in reply to @ 2015-343 13:19 UTCThey can't really prevent it from happening — even if they had "all rights reserved" that only gives them the legal right to have it take down and/or sue. You can never fully prevent it.
As it is, their best bet is probably to post their own music for sale themselves, and use their brand and fanbase to make their official postings the most popular ones. The people posting their music are doing nothing wrong, and especially if the band is not listed on that platform yet are doing a service exactly in the spirit of the license.
in reply to @ 2015-343 01:57 UTCI have an X60 running libreboot. One of the best machines I ever had (except the battery life)
in reply to @ 2015-342 18:16 UTCPitivi or OpenShot, the former is the simplest, but the latter has more features
in reply to @ 2015-342 18:13 UTCThat article advocates a particular business model (proprietary re-licensing) which only applies to a limited number of project types. Many projects find that simply charging for the actual binaries is more effective.
in reply to @ 2015-342 03:49 UTCYou don't lose it, but if you never enforce it's functionally the same as not having it at all.
in reply to @ 2015-341 13:38 UTC+1 openmailbox
in reply to @ 2015-340 21:13 UTC
in reply to @ 2015-339 18:08 UTCas long as in (1) "You" are the copyright holder, then it can be like that, if you want. Though the suing part is expensive
in reply to @ 2015-338 23:04 UTCWhat youtube videos? can you link an example?