4 ms·

> I did this release for them Did I miss something? Over the past 7 years the Libreboot project has been extremely aggressive towards the FSF. Going so far as

> I did this release for them Did I miss something? Over the past 7 years the Libreboot project has been extremely aggressive towards the FSF. Going so far as to say the GNU project shouldn't exist and throwing insults at individuals in the organization. The emphasis on the whole, "I did this release for them" honestly doesn't pass the sniff test and kind of feels like they're intentionally trying to create drama. The "why didn't they contact me" has a completely obvious answer based on past interactions. So here's a better question, why didn't Libreboot contact GNU before trying to publish their own GNU Boot release? Why did they try to impersonate them?

torstenvl 3y ago
No. The better question is, why didn't FSF contact Leah before trying to publish their own Libreboot releases at libreboot.at? Why did they try to impersonate Libreboot? Whatever you may think of Leah publishing an unofficial GNU Boot release for them to rebase off of, she didn't try to impersonate them by buying a confusingly similar domain. Compare her single reference to an "unofficial GNUBoot release" to this: https://libreboot.at/ https://libreboot.at/
- evasb 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - torstenvl 3y ago
    The OP link is a trademark enforcement action for an FSF-owned trademark. A project cannot enforce FSF-owned trademarks if the FSF "has nothing to do with it." I suspect you know very well that what you said is false.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - whstl 3y ago
    Happy to be corrected, but according to these two websites [1] [2], the maintainers that were booted were Andrew Robbins and Sebastian Grzywna, and that happened two years before Adrien Bourmault and Denis Carikli created libreboot.at. Libreboot.at itself seems to be a reaction to binary-blobs, not to this other drama. [1] https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot.org/news/resignations.html https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot... Unless there was a third "abandonment" and a "takeover" after that, I don't see how those events are related. Once again, happy to be corrected.
- slabity 3y ago
  > No. The better question is, why didn't FSF contact Leah before trying to publish their own Libreboot releases at libreboot.at? Why did they try to impersonate Libreboot? That's not a better question at all. They list out their explicit reasoning for their attempted name takeover. I definitely don't agree with it, but I have no reason to believe that they're lying about their own beliefs. I absolutely do have reason to doubt Leah's words of releasing GNU Boot as being in good faith though. Their history of drama with them is the reason for my doubt. In terms of practicality, I feel like a better reaction would have been to either trademark their project name or maintain a separate fork of Libreboot that would include the binary blobs. Why resort to trademark infringement?
  - 1000bestlives 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - foota 3y ago
      The whole thing is unprofessional on both sides. At least the libreboot fork site is clear in why it was created, but the core boot fork page is a mess.
    - Dah00n 3y ago
      There's absolutely nothing laudable in that at all and it screams of drama queen. "Lesser coders" - well that's is one person I'd avoid at all cost. Also, empty barrels make the most noise!
      - 1000bestlives 3y ago
        Dramaphobic, and probably transphobic to boot. You need to be better than you are right now.
        Dah00n 3y ago
        It says a lot that you see an aversion to drama as a bad thing. I have no idea what transphobic got to do with anything, but I'm not surprised someone who apparently has a drama fetish throws it around.
0dayz 3y ago
I was completely unaware of this, and yet they collaborate with each other? Do you have potential sources for this?
- slabity 3y ago
  > and yet they collaborate with each other? Libreboot use to be part of the GNU project, but I'm not aware of any collaboration after the fact. I just know the primary author/maintainer of Libreboot had a falling out with the FSF and GNU project. I don't think they ever reconciled (and I'm not sure they will at this point). As for the cause of their falling out, this happened around 2016 when the FSF let go of a transgender employee. It appears the original statements by the Libreboot maintainer was deleted off of their site, but they are archived[0][1] and the original email sent out declaring themselves no longer part of the GNU project[2] Just to be clear, I am not sure if an actual reason was given out for why they were fired. The FSF had declined giving an actual reason, and Richard Stallman himself stated "The dismissal of the staff person was not because of her gender. Her gender now is the same as it was when we hired her. It was not an issue then, and it is not an issue now."[3] Those articles and emails are the only primary sources that I'm aware of. There might be more information somewhere else, but unfortunately I don't really know of anything further. There was more drama later on. Something about the author leaving the project and then forcibly taking it back a few years later down the line against other contributor's wishes. But I think the reason for that was a bit more nuanced and I didn't keep up with that. I'm not even sure it had anything to do with the FSF or GNU project anyways. [0] https://archive.is/T8BBA https://archive.is/T8BBA [1] https://archive.is/q5uod https://archive.is/q5uod [2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00036.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0003... [3] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00052.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0005...
  - 0dayz 3y ago
    I see, it sound indeed a bit more nuanced than just drama. Thanks for sharing!

torstenvl 3y ago

No. The better question is, why didn't FSF contact Leah before trying to publish their own Libreboot releases at libreboot.at? Why did they try to impersonate Libreboot? Whatever you may think of Leah publishing an unofficial GNU Boot release for them to rebase off of, she didn't try to impersonate them by buying a confusingly similar domain. Compare her single reference to an "unofficial GNUBoot release" to this: https://libreboot.at/ https://libreboot.at/

evasb 3y ago
[flagged]
- torstenvl 3y ago
  The OP link is a trademark enforcement action for an FSF-owned trademark. A project cannot enforce FSF-owned trademarks if the FSF "has nothing to do with it." I suspect you know very well that what you said is false.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- whstl 3y ago
  Happy to be corrected, but according to these two websites [1] [2], the maintainers that were booted were Andrew Robbins and Sebastian Grzywna, and that happened two years before Adrien Bourmault and Denis Carikli created libreboot.at. Libreboot.at itself seems to be a reaction to binary-blobs, not to this other drama. [1] https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot.org/news/resignations.html https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot... Unless there was a third "abandonment" and a "takeover" after that, I don't see how those events are related. Once again, happy to be corrected.
slabity 3y ago
> No. The better question is, why didn't FSF contact Leah before trying to publish their own Libreboot releases at libreboot.at? Why did they try to impersonate Libreboot? That's not a better question at all. They list out their explicit reasoning for their attempted name takeover. I definitely don't agree with it, but I have no reason to believe that they're lying about their own beliefs. I absolutely do have reason to doubt Leah's words of releasing GNU Boot as being in good faith though. Their history of drama with them is the reason for my doubt. In terms of practicality, I feel like a better reaction would have been to either trademark their project name or maintain a separate fork of Libreboot that would include the binary blobs. Why resort to trademark infringement?
- 1000bestlives 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - foota 3y ago
    The whole thing is unprofessional on both sides. At least the libreboot fork site is clear in why it was created, but the core boot fork page is a mess.
  - Dah00n 3y ago
    There's absolutely nothing laudable in that at all and it screams of drama queen. "Lesser coders" - well that's is one person I'd avoid at all cost. Also, empty barrels make the most noise!
    - 1000bestlives 3y ago
      Dramaphobic, and probably transphobic to boot. You need to be better than you are right now.
      - Dah00n 3y ago
        It says a lot that you see an aversion to drama as a bad thing. I have no idea what transphobic got to do with anything, but I'm not surprised someone who apparently has a drama fetish throws it around.

0dayz 3y ago

I was completely unaware of this, and yet they collaborate with each other? Do you have potential sources for this?

slabity 3y ago
> and yet they collaborate with each other? Libreboot use to be part of the GNU project, but I'm not aware of any collaboration after the fact. I just know the primary author/maintainer of Libreboot had a falling out with the FSF and GNU project. I don't think they ever reconciled (and I'm not sure they will at this point). As for the cause of their falling out, this happened around 2016 when the FSF let go of a transgender employee. It appears the original statements by the Libreboot maintainer was deleted off of their site, but they are archived[0][1] and the original email sent out declaring themselves no longer part of the GNU project[2] Just to be clear, I am not sure if an actual reason was given out for why they were fired. The FSF had declined giving an actual reason, and Richard Stallman himself stated "The dismissal of the staff person was not because of her gender. Her gender now is the same as it was when we hired her. It was not an issue then, and it is not an issue now."[3] Those articles and emails are the only primary sources that I'm aware of. There might be more information somewhere else, but unfortunately I don't really know of anything further. There was more drama later on. Something about the author leaving the project and then forcibly taking it back a few years later down the line against other contributor's wishes. But I think the reason for that was a bit more nuanced and I didn't keep up with that. I'm not even sure it had anything to do with the FSF or GNU project anyways. [0] https://archive.is/T8BBA https://archive.is/T8BBA [1] https://archive.is/q5uod https://archive.is/q5uod [2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00036.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0003... [3] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00052.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg0005...
- 0dayz 3y ago
  I see, it sound indeed a bit more nuanced than just drama. Thanks for sharing!