Yeah I should have thought that through a bit more before posting it.
> Maybe it would work if it was based on the production volume and product category, not the size of the company. Not sure how the IP thing would work, but making it possible to reuse/recycle electronics that would otherwise end up in a landfill due to no other reason than software locks is a good idea.
THIS!
> But forcing a company to relinquish its intellectual property just because they're successful seems counter-intuitive. Maybe they just need to make it possible to install alternative firmware (whether or not it exists) in a reasonable way for no additional cost.
Well, this too, with a twist...
I'm not saying they have to relinquish their IP. There's a difference between open sourcing something and relinquishing intellectual property. One says "the world can USE this" and the other says "the world can use this and somebody can PROFIT FROM IT." I'm saying exclusively the former. I'm not OK with them being forced to allow somebody else to pick up their work and make money on it without them getting a cut purely because the government forced that function, that's not ok. So maybe if there's going to be a forcing function here there needs to be some kind of licensing that allows their IP to be used purely in non-profit contexts.
...but then again, coming back to my whole "should have thought it through before posting" notion, no profit might mean no maintaining body. So...I dunno.
It just rubs me the wrong way that Google launches new products and kills just as many every single year, and loads of people worldwide get screwed in the process while they get away with it every single time. If they're going to keep doing this, and let's face it, they are, the world at large oughtta get a little something out of it. Seems like having them open source the thing they're clearly not going to make any money on anyway is the right thing to do here.
> Maybe it would work if it was based on the production volume and product category, not the size of the company. Not sure how the IP thing would work, but making it possible to reuse/recycle electronics that would otherwise end up in a landfill due to no other reason than software locks is a good idea.
THIS!
> But forcing a company to relinquish its intellectual property just because they're successful seems counter-intuitive. Maybe they just need to make it possible to install alternative firmware (whether or not it exists) in a reasonable way for no additional cost.
Well, this too, with a twist...
I'm not saying they have to relinquish their IP. There's a difference between open sourcing something and relinquishing intellectual property. One says "the world can USE this" and the other says "the world can use this and somebody can PROFIT FROM IT." I'm saying exclusively the former. I'm not OK with them being forced to allow somebody else to pick up their work and make money on it without them getting a cut purely because the government forced that function, that's not ok. So maybe if there's going to be a forcing function here there needs to be some kind of licensing that allows their IP to be used purely in non-profit contexts.
...but then again, coming back to my whole "should have thought it through before posting" notion, no profit might mean no maintaining body. So...I dunno.
It just rubs me the wrong way that Google launches new products and kills just as many every single year, and loads of people worldwide get screwed in the process while they get away with it every single time. If they're going to keep doing this, and let's face it, they are, the world at large oughtta get a little something out of it. Seems like having them open source the thing they're clearly not going to make any money on anyway is the right thing to do here.