[Arm-netbook] Patent-Left

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Jean Flamelle <eaterjolly at gmail.com> wrote:

>> and place huge burdens on people.  FCC 2G/3G/LTE Certification (per
>> firmware revision, per product, per *version* of product, per
>> *company* e.g. AT&T... $50k *EACH*...), BLE Certification (USD $10,000
>> per software release *per factory*), and so on.
>
> I heard that's what keeps fairphone out of the US.

 motorola got round it by *WRITING* the FCC tests... and charging
themselves half the fees (*only* $25k per product per version per
firmware-release per network).

 whereas every other company would go after world networks and finally
return to the US, motorola instead went the other way round precisely
because it's so hard everyone else stays clear.


>>  that's gonna get really old, really quickly.
>
> Already has for me tbh xD

 nnnnngh :)

> -
>
>>  i know that the FSF, whom people are in effect "Authorised to
>> Represent" when they received the RYF Endorsement Certification Mark,
>
> That gets to an interesting idea of patent-left: what-if anyone
> receiving certification to use a hypothetical "left"-patent, was as a
> condition of the license allowed to certify anyone else irrevocably
> unless their use or use of anyone directly certified or endorsed by
> them, causes proven harm with their use to anyone emotionally,
> physically, or socially---aside from game-theory-arbitrary conflict
> that just happens to involve an instance of the patent's use through
> no fault of the implementation. Sounds like MLM.

 yehyeh :)  ok i'll have to think this through.  my initial reaction
is, manufacturers absolutely not, end-users *maybe*.  actual patents:
almost certainly not.  people genuinely hate them with a vengeance
such that it *doesn't matter* if it's a workable idea.  also, patents
are not the right vehicle (and are stupidly expensive to register)


>>  so i believe there's room for both types of approaches... the
>> question is: which approach could risk causing harm?  btw, just to be
>> clear: anyone who *guarantees* full libre compliance (releases
>> everything under libre licenses - casework, CAD, source, everything)
>> zero charges *and* assistance in any way possible.
>
> I think there is too, though I hope to make the ever more communal
> option safer and easier to protect legally with this brainstorm.
> That's still a longterm goal. We can always run the risk of being too
> strict and loosen the way we do things later, so long as you, RMS, and
> the entirety of the FSF stick to their guns (morals).

 yehyeh.

> (which should that even be a question at this point?)

 well, the question is: what would happen such that i would be willing
to throw away (waste) the efforts of seven years of my life (so far)?
a billion dollars with no conditions / strings attached (no
non-compete clauses so i could start again immediately) would probably
do it...

> It's like asking if someone with endorsement from peta will ever start
> killing animals for sport.
> (maybe because somewhere down the line they started to blindly assume
> humane population control strategies will never succeed)

 yeh you can never say never: remember, "certainty is a pathological
state of mind"

> Thank you to Luke and everyone contributing to make this all happen btw.

 thx jean.

l.