It is a terrible way to start
Alfred - where do you suggest we start?
* Lobbying for mandated free software in government-procured hardware? * Boycotting every company which distributes hardware containing proprietary software? * Refusing to use any hardware containing nonfree software? * Raising funds to pay Free Software developers to work on reverse-engineering devices? * Raising funds to buy hundreds of nonfree gadgets for study by Free developers? * Creating a startup on the basis of a revolutionary idea: a totally Free GSM phone or PDA?
I believe most companies value the GPL first because it guarantees a level playing field for a superior development methodology, and second because it is the right thing to do. That's the nature of business. Seen in this light, a manufacturer does not operate in a vacuum, but facing competitors. I think great strides could be made if competitors could "disarm" simultaneously. It's what we are slowly but surely seeing throughout the software industry and I feel sure the embedded and gadget industries will follow suit. The near-total absence of Free GSM phones and PDAs is, I think, largely because the manufacturers and their partners the telcos remain better able to make high margins on proprietary gadgets. A successful Free gadget would break the mold, but to be Free, developers need experience. So what's the suggestion?
* Lobbying for mandated free software in government-procured hardware? * Boycotting every company which distributes hardware containing proprietary software? * Refusing to use any hardware containing nonfree software? * Raising funds to pay Free Software developers to work on reverse-engineering devices? * Raising funds to buy hundreds of nonfree gadgets for study by Free developers? * Creating a startup on the basis of a revolutionary idea: a totally Free GSM phone or PDA?
All excellent ideas that do not involve distributing non-free software. The FSFE could also employ (not just gather funds) someone to write a free replacement, or presure companies like Nokia into releasing specifications, and other details that are needed to write these things. It works quite well for other projects.
It seems that the FSFE, including many free software proponents lack balls in these matters, and opt to do the wrong things, in this case: recommending and distributing non-free software to people. And really, why are people here condoning this behaviour and trying to justify it?
I can understand that someone made a honest mistake, but from the looks people in the FSFE are trying to justify that they have the responsiblity into make non-free software more accesible to people!