[u-u] license fragmentation [was: ethical objection to Zoom]
D. Hugh Redelmeier
hugh at mimosa.com
Sat Jun 13 09:14:32 EDT 2020
| From: Hugh Gamble <hugh at phaedrav.com>
| Jitsi is too small, to new, and to incomplete
| to have the kinds of problems all successful systems run into.
I don't understand what you are saying. Jitsi worked fine for the
GTALUG meeting this week. That doesn't lead to a conclusion that it
can replace Zoom in general, but it suggests that it could replace
UU's use of Zoom.
| But Open Source(tm) licence encumbered software
| is not free from political problems either.
| We've seen a recent fracturing of open source style licence models
| based on divisive and punitive politics and infighting.
I don't know what you are referring to here.
Has Jitsi's got a fractured licencing model?
| Personally, I'm as concerned about companies that continue to
| operate in the US as I am about companies that operate in Russia
| or China.
I'm concerned, but not nearly as concerned.
The damage caused to enforce and extend copyright bother me too.
The moves to ban end-to-end encryption are concerning, but those aren't
| And as a Canadian I am most concerned about the ethics of Canadian software
| and services.
OK. But with a decent open source license, Jitsi code is not rooted
in any country. Jitsi services hosted in a particular country are
likely subject to that country's laws.
| Let's try to minimise the harm from Canadian censorship by companies like
| by patronizing companies like Baidu and Yandex that place fewer restrictions,
| and less manipulation on Canadians.
What Canadian censorship? Child porn? Other porn? Copyright
More information about the u-u