[Arm-netbook] Reverse engineering for freedom is a fine use of non-free software

[J.B. Nicholson]

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>  indeed.  it may sound strange but when there is no other option (and
> by that i mean *exhaustive* analysis finds no other option) i do not
> mind "crossing the line" into what would traditionally be viewed by
> software libre purists as "unacceptable territory" *IF* in doing so it
> is part of a long-term strategy to *REPLACE* the very thing being
> leveraged [to make money etc. etc.]

Richard Stallman (whose objection to non-free software should require no 
explanation) concurs, he has long said that installing and running non-free 
software is okay for the purpose of making a free replacement (see 
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/is-ever-good-use-nonfree-program.html for 
his essay on this which includes a description of the limits of this 
methodology and rationale). Relatedly, he also has told University 
audiences that they should have reverse engineering courses (see 
https://audio-video.gnu.org/ for recordings of his many speeches). I agree 
with him on both points for the same reasons.

After all, once the reverse engineering is complete the free replacement 
should suffice to do the practical jobs and then the non-free, 
user-subjugating components should be removed in favor of using the free 
replacement.

>  for example: many software libre supporters flatly refuse to even
> *install* Windows NT... but if i had taken that attitude i would not
> have broken the NT Domains protocol, over 20 years ago.

I imagine this was and is also true for the Samba team.