No Blob without Puffy

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
79 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

No Blob without Puffy

Karel Kulhavy
Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns about
his copyrighted Puffy logo?
http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg

I also couldn't use Puffy logo on Ronja because then I wouldn't be able to talk
about OpenBSD negatively if it came out there is some serious problem with
Ronja and OpenBSD together.

I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy. Puffy is not something
you steal from a bowl and it disappears. I also have a Ronja logo which is
under GFDL and noone is stealing it and damaging me. The same for the Linux Tux
I have the feeling.

CL<

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

StrongBad
On Mar 16, 2007, at 12:18 PM, Karel Kulhavy wrote:

> I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy.

You don't understand! Theo's just trying to protect us. Handling the  
deadly
pufferfish is very dangerous, and best left to experts!

--
Jack J. Woehr
Director of Development
Absolute Performance, Inc.
[hidden email]
303-443-7000 ext. 527

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Greg Thomas-3
In reply to this post by Karel Kulhavy
On 3/16/07, Karel Kulhavy <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns about
> his copyrighted Puffy logo?
> http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg
>
> I also couldn't use Puffy logo on Ronja because then I wouldn't be able to talk
> about OpenBSD negatively if it came out there is some serious problem with
> Ronja and OpenBSD together.
>
> I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy. Puffy is not something
> you steal from a bowl and it disappears. I also have a Ronja logo which is
> under GFDL and noone is stealing it and damaging me. The same for the Linux Tux
> I have the feeling.
>

Oh, goodness.  I, for one, am glad that Theo is more concerned with
making a solid OS than worriying about how ubiquitous the project's
mascot is.

Greg

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by Karel Kulhavy
> Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns about
> his copyrighted Puffy logo?
> http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg

No.  That is false.  Whoever told you that lied to you.

> I also couldn't use Puffy logo on Ronja because then I wouldn't be able to talk
> about OpenBSD negatively if it came out there is some serious problem with
> Ronja and OpenBSD together.

There is a serious problem with what allbsd is doing.  They first
approached me on the 13th with a campaign using our "Stop the Blob"
slogan.  That is something OpenBSD takes very seriously, yet at the
bottom of the poster you can see a list of operating systems which
specifically use a Blob, and actually those projects work against us
when we take on vendors pushing Blobs.

Of course the first Blob to mention is the Atheros driver in all
those operating systems.

But more and more of these Blob's are making it into FreeBSD all the
time.  The Nvidia driver (though now they are using our nvidia driver,
and they have a nvidia employee on their team who commits things to
that driver without talking to anyone).  And the same thing is
happening to lots of other drivers in FreeBSD.  FreeBSD apparently has
a signed agreement with Nvidia over the accelerated video driver, and
I guess that creates a reluctance amongst them to fight Nvidia with us
for ethernet drivers.  The same has happened with other things like
Adaptec RAID.  FreeBSD developers actively side with the vendors when
we demand documentation.

So isn't it rather hypocritical to have a anti-Blob campaign, backed
by projects which embrace the Blob?

After being shown the first version of the art (showing our slogan,
and all the BSD's down below), I told allbsd that
        (1) they cannot misuse our slogan like that
        (2) I felt their whole campaign was hypocritical

Daniel Seuffert got very angry, and instead of removing operating
systems which are pro-Blob from an anti-Blob posted, they instead
deleted us.

Isn't that just incredible?

> I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy. Puffy is not something
> you steal from a bowl and it disappears. I also have a Ronja logo which is
> under GFDL and noone is stealing it and damaging me. The same for the Linux Tux
> I have the feeling.

You've got it wrong.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

K Kadow
In reply to this post by Karel Kulhavy
It'd be great if Theo could make a clear statement on Puffy, the same
as  Marshall Kirk McKusick has for the daemon.  I had cause to use a
variant of Marshall's beastie for a project which was marginally
within his published guidelines, and had no problem getting
permission.


On 3/16/07, Karel Kulhavy <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns about
> his copyrighted Puffy logo?
> http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg

Not only is puffy not there, the word "OpenBSD" is also absent, and
Theo has explained exactly what happened.  It's not about the blowfish
at all.


> I also couldn't use Puffy logo on Ronja because then I wouldn't be able to talk
> about OpenBSD negatively if it came out there is some serious problem with
> Ronja and OpenBSD together.
>
> I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy. Puffy is not something
> you steal from a bowl and it disappears. I also have a Ronja logo which is
> under GFDL and noone is stealing it and damaging me. The same for the Linux Tux
> I have the feeling.

Not quite how trademark law works, see http://preview.tinyurl.com/2crjgc

Specifically, it appears you could legally use Puffy on a Ronja logo
"to indicate compatibility", and you could still feel free to "talk
about OpenBSD negatively", even under Canadian trademark law.

In the "No blob" case, the issue would be that using *any* OpenBSD
mark would "suggest sponsorship or endorsement", puffy or no puffy.
And Theo has made it clear how he feels about endorsing that specific
campaign.


Jack J. Woehr writes:
>  Handling the deadly pufferfish is very dangerous, and best left to experts!

The only legal imports to the US are pre-processed and flash frozen,
with all tetrodotoxin safely removed.

Fugu is good food.


IANAL, YMMV

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

beck-7
In reply to this post by Karel Kulhavy
* Karel Kulhavy <[hidden email]> [2007-03-16 12:20]:
> Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns about
> his copyrighted Puffy logo?
> http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg

        Hunh? a "No Blob" poster with FreeBSD on it? that's a
fucking joke. they're the biggest vendor whores around putting
blob drivers in their os! heck they're one of the biggest
reasons it remains a problem!

>
> I also couldn't use Puffy logo on Ronja because then I wouldn't be able to talk
> about OpenBSD negatively if it came out there is some serious problem with
> Ronja and OpenBSD together.
>
> I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy. Puffy is not something
> you steal from a bowl and it disappears. I also have a Ronja logo which is
> under GFDL and noone is stealing it and damaging me. The same for the Linux Tux
> I have the feeling.

        Not having the background on what Theo has or hasn't done
I wouldn't know, but frankly, I wouldn't want to see OpenBSD
on anything so misguided.  Putting FreeBSD on a No Blob poster
is like putting the Royal Dutch Shell and Exxon logos on a poster
about reducing global CO2 emissions.

        If you have nothing better to do that look at "campaigns"
at least find a campaign where it appears the people doing it
understand this issues. this one is relatively obvious that
they don't - at all - Or maybe they're sponsored by Altheros and
Nvidious for all I know.

        -Bob

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

J.C. Roberts
On Friday 16 March 2007 12:56, Bob Beck wrote:
>         If you have nothing better to do that look at "campaigns"
> at least find a campaign where it appears the people doing it
> understand this issues.

Can you actually name a technical campaign besides openbsd that actually
understands both the relevant issues and their eventual impacts?

sad but true

jcr

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Theo de Raadt
> On Friday 16 March 2007 12:56, Bob Beck wrote:
> >         If you have nothing better to do that look at "campaigns"
> > at least find a campaign where it appears the people doing it
> > understand this issues.
>
> Can you actually name a technical campaign besides openbsd that actually
> understands both the relevant issues and their eventual impacts?

I can.

About 20 people in Debian.

OK, it's not a whole problem, but there are about 20 people there
who are trying to build up to the same principles.  Last year it
was about half as many people.  They are building a voice, as time
goes by.

Their voice is gaining, and I think it will gain even more in the near
future because of the locked-down-blob linux-based cell phone
situation that is about to kick the entire Linux community in their
collective ass.  We'll see.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Karel Kulhavy
In reply to this post by K Kadow
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 02:06:50PM -0500, K K wrote:

> It'd be great if Theo could make a clear statement on Puffy, the same
> as  Marshall Kirk McKusick has for the daemon.  I had cause to use a
> variant of Marshall's beastie for a project which was marginally
> within his published guidelines, and had no problem getting
> permission.
>
>
> On 3/16/07, Karel Kulhavy <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns about
> >his copyrighted Puffy logo?
> >http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg
>
> Not only is puffy not there, the word "OpenBSD" is also absent, and
> Theo has explained exactly what happened.  It's not about the blowfish
> at all.
>
>
> >I also couldn't use Puffy logo on Ronja because then I wouldn't be able to
> >talk
> >about OpenBSD negatively if it came out there is some serious problem with
> >Ronja and OpenBSD together.
> >
> >I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy. Puffy is not
> >something
> >you steal from a bowl and it disappears. I also have a Ronja logo which is
> >under GFDL and noone is stealing it and damaging me. The same for the
> >Linux Tux
> >I have the feeling.
>
> Not quite how trademark law works, see http://preview.tinyurl.com/2crjgc

The problem is that the Puffy is an artist work, governed by the copyright /
author rights stuff. I asked Theo about still being able to criticize the
project freely as I want, and he told me that I can't.

What Theo says is consistent with what the website says:
"However, it is our intent that anyone be able to use these images to represent
OpenBSD in a positive light"
http://openbsd.org/art1.html

See? "Positive light".

Theo explained he needs it to protect his project and that it's required by law
that he acts so protective. To me this appears absurd, but Theo has the
copyright and he can tell where Puffy can be used and where not.

I have ordered a Puffy sticker to stick on my snowboard, that doesn't have any
legal hitches, I'll post a picture when I put it there :)

>
> Specifically, it appears you could legally use Puffy on a Ronja logo

It wasn't even on Ronja logo it was just in the list of software used.

> "to indicate compatibility", and you could still feel free to "talk
> about OpenBSD negatively", even under Canadian trademark law.

Trademark is not a problem, the problem lies in the copyright.

>
> In the "No blob" case, the issue would be that using *any* OpenBSD
> mark would "suggest sponsorship or endorsement", puffy or no puffy.
> And Theo has made it clear how he feels about endorsing that specific
> campaign.

So it's not about Puffy copyright, but about Theo not likes the campaign?
Well then it makes sense.

CL<

>
>
> Jack J. Woehr writes:
> > Handling the deadly pufferfish is very dangerous, and best left to
> > experts!
>
> The only legal imports to the US are pre-processed and flash frozen,
> with all tetrodotoxin safely removed.
>
> Fugu is good food.
>
>
> IANAL, YMMV

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Karel Kulhavy
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 12:38:05PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns about
> > his copyrighted Puffy logo?
> > http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg
>
> No.  That is false.  Whoever told you that lied to you.

That was written in this post on a Swiss IT news portal:
http://www.symlink.ch/comments.pl?sid=07/03/15/1557213&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=9

If you don't understand German, I can try to translate (I don't understand
wel):
"Oh, that's even better. allbsd.de has started a "Stop Blob" campaign. While
the other BSD's can identify themselves with it, Theo thought that they would
put his intellectual property to danger, steal ideas and use the Puffy fish
illegitimately on the poster.

(The e-mail went on the allbsd-misc mailing list but I can't find an archive
link at the moment.) The campaign is now called NoBlob
http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/
"

>
> > I also couldn't use Puffy logo on Ronja because then I wouldn't be able to talk
> > about OpenBSD negatively if it came out there is some serious problem with
> > Ronja and OpenBSD together.
>
> There is a serious problem with what allbsd is doing.  They first
> approached me on the 13th with a campaign using our "Stop the Blob"
> slogan.  That is something OpenBSD takes very seriously, yet at the
> bottom of the poster you can see a list of operating systems which
> specifically use a Blob, and actually those projects work against us
> when we take on vendors pushing Blobs.
>
> Of course the first Blob to mention is the Atheros driver in all
> those operating systems.

I wanted to use Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 in my laptop to connect to wireless
network in my work. I found out from the manpage it requires nonfree firmware
files (is this a blob?). Instead of downloading them, I dropped an e-mail to
the address mentioned in the manpage saying like they can stick their blob up
their ass.

I can use a wire connectivity for most of the time. Should I need a wireless
connections, there are other methods than IPW 2100.

I think it's just right to categorically refuse blobs even when the users
cannot use their hardware. They should avoid hardware crippleware. My fault
that I didn't.

>
> But more and more of these Blob's are making it into FreeBSD all the
> time.  The Nvidia driver (though now they are using our nvidia driver,

I just wonder what happens if every commercial manufacturer starts requiring a
blob?  Will OpenBSD stop existing? Or will you adapt a pro-blob policy? Or will
someone pop up and design a free hardware design for that product category?

> and they have a nvidia employee on their team who commits things to
> that driver without talking to anyone).  And the same thing is
> happening to lots of other drivers in FreeBSD.  FreeBSD apparently has
> a signed agreement with Nvidia over the accelerated video driver, and

So you have absolutely no signed NDA agreements?

> I guess that creates a reluctance amongst them to fight Nvidia with us
> for ethernet drivers.  The same has happened with other things like
> Adaptec RAID.  FreeBSD developers actively side with the vendors when
> we demand documentation.
>
> So isn't it rather hypocritical to have a anti-Blob campaign, backed
> by projects which embrace the Blob?
>
> After being shown the first version of the art (showing our slogan,
> and all the BSD's down below), I told allbsd that
> (1) they cannot misuse our slogan like that
> (2) I felt their whole campaign was hypocritical
>
> Daniel Seuffert got very angry, and instead of removing operating
> systems which are pro-Blob from an anti-Blob posted, they instead
> deleted us.
>
> Isn't that just incredible?

It's just an ordinary political practice. Talks about morality and truth are
used in a straightforward manner to get better sales without a regard to actual
consistency or correcntess.

>
> > I think Theo should stop being paranoid about his Puffy. Puffy is not something
> > you steal from a bowl and it disappears. I also have a Ronja logo which is
> > under GFDL and noone is stealing it and damaging me. The same for the Linux Tux
> > I have the feeling.
>
> You've got it wrong.

Now it makes sense. The adoption rate of a product typically goes up with how
crap it is. So your explanation is more plausible than theirs because FreeBSD
has higher adoption.

CL<

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Ingo Schwarze
Hi Karel,

Karel Kulhavy wrote on Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 10:38:11AM +0100:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 12:38:05PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>> Someone asked:

>>> Is it true that Puffy is not here because of Theo's concerns
>>> about his copyrighted Puffy logo?
>>> http://misc.allbsd.de/Kampagnen/NoBlob/NoBlob-en-Poster.jpg
>>
>> No.  That is false.  Whoever told you that lied to you.
>
> That was written in this post on a Swiss IT news portal:
> http://www.symlink.ch/comments.pl?sid=07/03/15/1557213 \
>   &threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=9

Oh please, don't be absurd.  That bulletin board posting is so
obviously sarcastic that you just cannot take it seriously.
Besides, even if it could be serious: When trying to understand
Theo's ideas, it should be well known that it's no good trying
to start from what Thorsten might be thinking about them
(not judging the rest of Thorsten's work and ideas in any way).
If you don't understand German well and know little about the
people involved, then at least you have been jumping to conclusions.

Concerning the rest of your questions:  All this has been
discussed an re-discussed ad nauseum.  Please do make an effort
to find some information yourself before asking, or you will
start getting on people's nerves, even if you do not intend to.

Two hints:
1. Do not confuse firmware blobs with kernel space driver blobs.
   These are two completely different kinds of animals.
2. Avoid the discussion of purely hypothetical situations
   (like "no hardware specs for any hardware on the market").
   Rather try to focus on real problems.

Yours,
  Ingo

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Ray Percival
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

<snip>
>   Please do make an effort
> to find some information yourself before asking, or you will
> start getting on people's nerves, even if you do not intend to.
Start?
>
<snip>
iD8DBQFF/AzH5B7p9jYarz8RAm2BAJ9ak/sun5B61mKN/jIF0GqMJbiy0gCfSsbx
9USyHH/QNgeX53vWKUovjxI=
=f4Os
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Theo de Raadt
In reply to this post by Karel Kulhavy
> > But more and more of these Blob's are making it into FreeBSD all the
> > time.  The Nvidia driver (though now they are using our nvidia driver,
>
> I just wonder what happens if every commercial manufacturer starts requiring a
> blob?  Will OpenBSD stop existing? Or will you adapt a pro-blob policy? Or will
> someone pop up and design a free hardware design for that product category?

If it wasn't for a few specific developers in the pro-Blob FreeBSD
community accepting these NDA's this battle would have been over a
long time ago.  By that I mean we'd be back to the way things were in
1987, when all hardware documentation was freely spread by vendors to
whoever wanted it.

> > and they have a nvidia employee on their team who commits things to
> > that driver without talking to anyone).  And the same thing is
> > happening to lots of other drivers in FreeBSD.  FreeBSD apparently has
> > a signed agreement with Nvidia over the accelerated video driver, and
>
> So you have absolutely no signed NDA agreements?

Not one.  OpenBSD does not have any NDA's signed with anyone.

Some developers privately may have NDA's signed here or there, but I
actively discourage them from doing so, and assist in conversations
with vendors.  When we tell vendors that we won't accept NDA's, most
times the hardware and documentation still arrives.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Daniel Seuffert-2
In reply to this post by Karel Kulhavy
Hi,

this is the conversation I had with Theo:

1. mail, 12.03.2007 01:29

Dear Theo,

allBSD is currently prepairing for the Stop Blob! campaign
an we have a poster ready here:

http://www.allbsd.de/src/Kampagnen/StopBlob/StopBlob-en-Poster.pdf

This is already translated into some languages, more are to come
soon and I'm currently writing a flyer that will be translated
too in as many languages as possible.

Any objections/ideas?

Best regadrs,

Daniel


2. mail from Theo, 12.03.2007 02:34:

I don't know why you are using a BSD daemon, when the two BSD's
that use Daemon imagery are the ones that ACCEPT blobs, in particular,
Sam Leffler's atheros driver.

So I absolutely do not see how you think you can go stealing our
campaign for your own use!

WE are the only people of the ones that you claim to represent
who are actually standing up for this issue.  If you put those other
project's names on there, that's unbelieveably disrespectful of
our efforts.

FreeBSD *specifically* has vendor drivers in it, and has developers
who work at vendors.  Not just Sam, but they also have an employee
of NVidia who they consider a developer, and who now makes changes
to the ethernet driver everyone got from us, without even replying
to mails from our developers who wrote it!

No.  I entirely object to what you are doing here.  You are trying
to make it look like those other projects are anti-blob, when they
are NOT.


3. mail from Theo, 12.03.2007 03:00:

Did you even think about the fact that there are only two operating
systems that ship without blobs?

        OpenBSD

        Debian (and derived systems)

FreeBSD and NetBSD are not on the list of blob-less operating systems.
Both of them ship with at least one blob, compiled directly into the
kernel.  Their developers have NEVER helped us fight for
documentation, or fight the blob.  They've made a couple vague words
sometimes, but then gone back to their American ways and talked about
the need to sometimes compromise.  They have UNDERMINED our efforts to
fight the blob, and now you want to include them in a poster about it?

I think you are not thinking your campaign through very well at all.


4. mail from me to Theo, 13.03.2007 01:16:

Theo de Raadt qrote:

> > I don't know why you are using a BSD daemon, when the two BSD's
> > that use Daemon imagery are the ones that ACCEPT blobs, in particular,
> > Sam Leffler's atheros driver.
> >
> > So I absolutely do not see how you think you can go stealing our
> > campaign for your own use!
> >
> > WE are the only people of the ones that you claim to represent
> > who are actually standing up for this issue.  If you put those other
> > project's names on there, that's unbelieveably disrespectful of
> > our efforts.
> >
> > FreeBSD *specifically* has vendor drivers in it, and has developers
> > who work at vendors.  Not just Sam, but they also have an employee
> > of NVidia who they consider a developer, and who now makes changes
> > to the ethernet driver everyone got from us, without even replying
> > to mails from our developers who wrote it!
> >
> > No.  I entirely object to what you are doing here.  You are trying
> > to make it look like those other projects are anti-blob, when they
> > are NOT.


Hi Theo,

in short: This campaign was startet after a long discussion internally
and we couldn't find ANY BSD-guy from whatever BSD that claimed Blobs
or NDAs are a good idea.

We have a large number of individuals using and contributing to all
BSDs and this is not a campaign pointing fingers to certain people
using Blobs.

This is a campaign to rise public awareness that Blobs are a bad idea
and they should support ALL BSDs fighting against it. We all need free
documentation and we all want it.

This campaign is totally unrelated to the one started with OpenBSD
3.9 and the poster for it and we haven't used anything from it, so
there's absolutely no "stealing our campaign". And no, nobody is
unrespectful here.

And btw it's not our own use. We want to help all BSDs in getting
more documentation.

Yes, there are 4 Blobs in FreeBSD-Generic, NetBSD maybe 1 but I would
better subscribe it as a firmware modul, MirOS none, DragonFly none
afaik. But this is a bad idea and a lot of FreeBSD-people sharing that
view. But this is BSD and freedom of choice. If somebody wants to use
NVidia drivers or the like it's his own risk, not mine or ours. Don't
complain, tell why it's wrong. And for that very purpose I'm writing
the flyer following soon.

The BSD deamon was used because it's the only symbol shared by all
BSDs and it looks nice, people liked the first poster draft a lot
when we showed it 2 weeks ago in Chemnitz (the poster was changed
in between after that experience).

You claim you don't get any support from the other BSDs and now a
group of other BSD-users starts that campaign and you complain.
Where's the beef?

Best regards, Daniel



5. mail from Theo, 13.03.2007 02:36:

> in short: This campaign was startet after a long discussion internally
> > and we couldn't find ANY BSD-guy from whatever BSD that claimed Blobs
> > or NDAs are a good idea.

Did you ask Sam Leffler, who writes a BLOB that is included in
FreeBSD?

I guess not.

Did you ask the Nvidia employee who works for FreeBSD?

Oh, they may they would say that Blobs are a bad idea, but sure as
hell won't argue against them either.

> > We have a large number of individuals using and contributing to all
> > BSDs and this is not a campaign pointing fingers to certain people
> > using Blobs.
> >
> > This is a campaign to rise public awareness that Blobs are a bad idea
> > and they should support ALL BSDs fighting against it. We all need free
> > documentation and we all want it.
> >
> > This campaign is totally unrelated to the one started with OpenBSD
> > 3.9 and the poster for it and we haven't used anything from it, so
> > there's absolutely no "stealing our campaign". And no, nobody is
> > unrespectful here.

This campaign is using our words.  If you release

> > And btw it's not our own use. We want to help all BSDs in getting
> > more documentation.

This campaign will not get the BSD's more documentation.  It will
tell a lie -- that lie being that the other BSD's are anti-BLOB,
when they have developers actively incorporating and shipping BLOBS.

Your whole campaign is a lie.

> > Yes, there are 4 Blobs in FreeBSD-Generic, NetBSD maybe 1 but I would
> > better subscribe it as a firmware modul, MirOS none, DragonFly none
> > afaik.

If those are firmware modules, then I don't know what a blob is.

> > But this is a bad idea and a lot of FreeBSD-people sharing that
> > view. But this is BSD and freedom of choice.

Fuck that.  It is not about freedom of choice.  Our campaign is about
the freedom to impliment on our hardware, code that we can trust.
You want to subvert our campaign, and turn it into a shadow of itself.

> > If somebody wants to use
> > NVidia drivers or the like it's his own risk, not mine or ours. Don't
> > complain, tell why it's wrong. And for that very purpose I'm writing
> > the flyer following soon.

The vendors are free to not release documentation, and they are free
to convince projects to incorporate blobs.  But you are going to send
out a flyer saying that the BSD's contain no blobs.

That is a big fat lie.  And it is not the vendors lying, nor is it
the projects lying.

You are the one telling a lie.

> > You claim you don't get any support from the other BSDs and now a
> > group of other BSD-users starts that campaign and you complain.
> > Where's the beef?

You are not one of "the other BSDs".  Your campaign will not support
more documentation.  It puts the name of BLOB-including operating
systems on a poster saying that they are anti-blob.  That's a bald
lie, and it undermines our effort.

OpenBSD distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
blobs.  Most other operating systems are completely fine with
incorporating blobs.  The other projects you are showing on the poster
specifically include blobs.  They do NOT help us get documentation.

When we ask vendors for documentation, the other projects do NOT back
us.  I've seen mails sent to vendors where FreeBSD developers try to
make our requests look wrong.  Yes, they have actively SHUTTLED our
attempts to get more documentation.

Why are you not capable of thinking clearly on this?

If you release that poster which uses our slogan in such an incredibly
false way, I will come out swinging.  I will probably post all these
emails.

If you want a campaign of some sort, invent something of your own.
Stealing our campaign just shows that you don't have any brains.


I am cc'ing Wim, to bring him into this conversation.


6. mail from me to Theo and Wim, 13.03.2007 19:08:

Theo de Raadt wrote:

>> >> in short: This campaign was startet after a long discussion internally
>> >> and we couldn't find ANY BSD-guy from whatever BSD that claimed Blobs
>> >> or NDAs are a good idea.
> >
> > Did you ask Sam Leffler, who writes a BLOB that is included in
> > FreeBSD?
> >
> > I guess not.
> >
> > Did you ask the Nvidia employee who works for FreeBSD?

The mere fact that some FreeBSD-guys include Blobs in GENERIC instead
of shipping a Blob-free FreeBSD and let the user choose if they like
to add Blobs is a sad story. I am totally sure we need to make clear
that a large part or maybe the majority of FreeBSD users don't like
that to change things.

You are a guy who hasn't learned anything from the past and that
accusations in public need to exactly nothing. And you will likely
never learn till the end of your life. That's your Karma and I respect
that.

> > Oh, they may they would say that Blobs are a bad idea, but sure as
> > hell won't argue against them either.
> >
>> >> We have a large number of individuals using and contributing to all
>> >> BSDs and this is not a campaign pointing fingers to certain people
>> >> using Blobs.
>> >>
>> >> This is a campaign to rise public awareness that Blobs are a bad idea
>> >> and they should support ALL BSDs fighting against it. We all need free
>> >> documentation and we all want it.
>> >>
>> >> This campaign is totally unrelated to the one started with OpenBSD
>> >> 3.9 and the poster for it and we haven't used anything from it, so
>> >> there's absolutely no "stealing our campaign". And no, nobody is
>> >> unrespectful here.
> >
> > This campaign is using our words.  If you release

Ok, the only thing OpenBSD-related is "Stob Blob!" and the
OpenBSD-logo. We respect that and we will eliminate that asap
to make sure nobody thinks this campaign has anything to do with OpenBSD.

>> >> And btw it's not our own use. We want to help all BSDs in getting
>> >> more documentation.
> >
> > This campaign will not get the BSD's more documentation.  It will
> > tell a lie -- that lie being that the other BSD's are anti-BLOB,
> > when they have developers actively incorporating and shipping BLOBS.
> >
> > Your whole campaign is a lie.
> >
>> >> Yes, there are 4 Blobs in FreeBSD-Generic, NetBSD maybe 1 but I would
>> >> better subscribe it as a firmware modul, MirOS none, DragonFly none
>> >> afaik.
> >
> > If those are firmware modules, then I don't know what a blob is.
> >
>> >> But this is a bad idea and a lot of FreeBSD-people sharing that
>> >> view. But this is BSD and freedom of choice.
> >
> > Fuck that.  It is not about freedom of choice.  Our campaign is about
> > the freedom to impliment on our hardware, code that we can trust.
> > You want to subvert our campaign, and turn it into a shadow of itself.
> >
>> >> If somebody wants to use
>> >> NVidia drivers or the like it's his own risk, not mine or ours. Don't
>> >> complain, tell why it's wrong. And for that very purpose I'm writing
>> >> the flyer following soon.
> >
> > The vendors are free to not release documentation, and they are free
> > to convince projects to incorporate blobs.  But you are going to send
> > out a flyer saying that the BSD's contain no blobs.

No, I havent't told you I would write that and you haven't seen the
unfinished flyer yet. You are assuming that I will tell lies, which
I will not. I will tell people which Blobs are used in each BSD and
that this is wrong imho. I'm not in a position to lie about anything,
neither to you nor any other person.

> > That is a big fat lie.  And it is not the vendors lying, nor is it
> > the projects lying.
> >
> > You are the one telling a lie.

Sorry, this is personal without any evidence/argument.

>> >> You claim you don't get any support from the other BSDs and now a
>> >> group of other BSD-users starts that campaign and you complain.
>> >> Where's the beef?
> >
> > You are not one of "the other BSDs".  Your campaign will not support
> > more documentation.  It puts the name of BLOB-including operating
> > systems on a poster saying that they are anti-blob.  That's a bald
> > lie, and it undermines our effort.
> >
> > OpenBSD distinguishes itself on the fact that it does not include
> > blobs.  Most other operating systems are completely fine with
> > incorporating blobs.  The other projects you are showing on the poster
> > specifically include blobs.  They do NOT help us get documentation.
> >
> > When we ask vendors for documentation, the other projects do NOT back
> > us.  I've seen mails sent to vendors where FreeBSD developers try to
> > make our requests look wrong.  Yes, they have actively SHUTTLED our
> > attempts to get more documentation.
> >
> > Why are you not capable of thinking clearly on this?
> >
> > If you release that poster which uses our slogan in such an incredibly
> > false way, I will come out swinging.  I will probably post all these
> > emails.

Please post all the mails on misc or whereever you may like, we don't
have anything to hide in public.

> > If you want a campaign of some sort, invent something of your own.
> > Stealing our campaign just shows that you don't have any brains.

We will eliminate anything that has the slightest touch of OpenBSD
and your campaign in it.

> > I am cc'ing Wim, to bring him into this conversation.

No prob with that.

Best regards and thanks for your attention and advice.

- Daniel



That was the conversation in detail, nothing altered, nothing left
out, read and draw your own conclusions.

Sorry, I'm not angry, I'm focused and productive.

Best regards, Daniel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

fuzzyping
On Mar 18, 2007, at 7:06 PM, SW wrote:

<snip a formerly private email thread>

I read your entire thread, and find it appalling that not only will  
you take someone's private email and broadcast it, but that it  
incriminates you on all counts.  You admit that FreeBSD continues to  
ship BLOBs, but you wish to keep them on your campaign against  
BLOBs.  Don't you see the hypocrisy in this action?

--
Jason Dixon
DixonGroup Consulting
http://www.dixongroup.net

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Luke Bakken
In reply to this post by Daniel Seuffert-2
> That was the conversation in detail, nothing altered, nothing left
> out, read and draw your own conclusions.

Conclusion: you are not contributing to the problem at all.

> Sorry, I'm not angry, I'm focused and productive.

Nope, not productive at all in my opinion. Theo is right on the mark about you.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Jason George
In reply to this post by Karel Kulhavy
>Hi,
>
>this is the conversation I had with Theo:


You just made private emails public, almost certainly without the permission
of the other parties involved.

Please deduct any and all karma points you thought you had.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Craig Brozefsky
In reply to this post by Daniel Seuffert-2
"SW" <[hidden email]> writes:

> Sorry, I'm not angry, I'm focused and productive.
>
> Best regards, Daniel

I think it is disingenuous to include those BSDs which have blobs on
such a flyer, especially in a position at the bottom which implies
sponsorship or support of such a campaign when they are actively in
violation of it's stated purpose.

How about you put their logos under the hammer?



--
Sincerely, Craig Brozefsky              <[hidden email]>
Free Scheme/Lisp Software     http://www.red-bean.com/~craig
Less matter, more form!                       - Bruno Schulz
ignazz, I am truly korrupted by yore sinful tzourceware. -jb
what a klon  - neko

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Daniel Seuffert-2
In reply to this post by fuzzyping
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Dixon [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 1:53 AM
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: No Blob without Puffy


On Mar 18, 2007, at 7:06 PM, SW wrote:

<snip a formerly private email thread>

I read your entire thread, and find it appalling that not only will  
you take someone's private email and broadcast it, but that it  
incriminates you on all counts.  You admit that FreeBSD continues to  
ship BLOBs, but you wish to keep them on your campaign against  
BLOBs.  Don't you see the hypocrisy in this action?

--
Jason Dixon
DixonGroup Consulting
http://www.dixongroup.net


1. We have nothing to hide. Theo wrote he would post the mails
in public, I told him to do so. There's nothing private in those
mails. Everybody has a right to know what was going on, read every
bit.

2. I asked Theo if OpenBSD has objections to this campaign. Theo
wrote that only BSDs with no Blobs should be on the poster. That's
OpenBSD policy. FreeBSD and NetBSD have a different policy. Theo
wanted OpenBSD removed from that poster, we did it. Theo claimed
that Stop Blob! is OpenBSD "intellectual property" so we changed
it to "No Blob!". If OpenBSD wants to improve the "Stop Blob!" campaign
please stop complaining and contribute. I wish OpenBSD the very best
and hope they will be able to succeed in any way.

3. FreeBSD has Blobs, there's no need for admitting, read the FreeBSD
cvs, this is not a secret.

4. You think the only way to fight Blobs is totally abandon them. All the
other BSDs have a different opinion. Because we have a different opinion
how too achieve something (we all want free documentation) doesn't mean
we like Blobs, NDAs or something. Yes, I am a FreeBSD-guy to the bone and I
don't like Blobs nor that I am using them. And I will not do any sort
of armchair quarterbacking. I will fight and tell the public what's
going on and why I don't like it.

5. OpenBSD thinks there should be no possibility whatsoever to use Blobs.
FreeBSD thinks it's up to the user to decide what's best for him. And
maybe that will include competition between Open Source BSD-licensed
drivers and Blobs. You can use Nvidia graphics drivers in FreeBSD and
you can use xorg. You can use NVE or NFE soon. That's freedom of choice,
Free as in FreeBSD (and NetBSD and DragonFly BSD etc.).

6. Go on with your fight for free documentation but please stop fighting
all other BSDs. It will lead to absolutely no good.

All the best for OpenBSD,

Daniel  

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Blob without Puffy

Rafael Almeida
In reply to this post by Daniel Seuffert-2
On 3/18/07, SW <[hidden email]> wrote:
> No, I havent't told you I would write that and you haven't seen the
> unfinished flyer yet. You are assuming that I will tell lies, which
> I will not. I will tell people which Blobs are used in each BSD and
> that this is wrong imho. I'm not in a position to lie about anything,
> neither to you nor any other person.
...
> Sorry, this is personal without any evidence/argument.

I'll have to agree with Theo on this one. You're definetly spreading a lie
with that flyer.

Anyone who reads the flyer as it is will probably assume that the 4 BSDs
are against blobs. When it's not really a fact. Maybe the greatest part
of freebsd and netbsd community is against blobs, but that's not what
the flyer is saying, it's saying that the projects are against blobs.
That's what those symbols represent, isn't it? And that's obviously not
true, since freebsd and netbsd ship with blobs. It's not like they have
no choice, there are big projects that ship their products without
blobs.

You may write nice documents explaining what a blob is and which systems
have and which do not. The problem is that the flyer is not telling us
that, it's suggesting that those 4 BSDs are against blob, and therefore
they don't have blobs. It may even trick people into installing freebsd
or netbsd thinking they're installing blob-free software and therefore
contributing to make the world free of blob.

1234