2 ms·
> That'd be problematic, as in many cases the vendor doesn't even have the full source code (think: all of the embedded chips that run their own RTOS), let alon
by josephcsible 3y ago
> That'd be problematic, as in many cases the vendor doesn't even have the full source code (think: all of the embedded chips that run their own RTOS), let alone the legal right of relicensing it.
I consider making closed-source more legally difficult to be an additional benefit, not a downside.
> Regardless of the actual physical condition of the item?
Yes. The idea is that it'd be better for things to continue to be safely usable rather than to have to become e-waste, so if the manufacturer chooses the option that requires the latter, the deal should be as one-sided as possible against them.
> Also, consider the smaller companies, that don't have the resources to effectively give you a 10-year warranty on their product.
Software updates are a lot cheaper than full warranties, and if they make all of their stuff open-source then there'd be nothing else they have to do at all.
- rollcat 3y ago> I consider making closed-source more legally difficult to be an additional benefit, not a downside. Then perhaps start with a copyright reform, otherwise I think you're trying to "solve" too many problems all at once. > so if the manufacturer chooses the option that requires the latter, the deal should be as one-sided as possible against them. Meaning only the already wealthy companies can afford to take the risk. You're further empowering the rich.