Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Free Software Foundation Demands That Microsoft Release Windows 7 as Free Software

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday January 30 2020, @02:07AM   Printer-friendly
from the pull-the-other-one dept.

takyon writes:

Upcycle Windows 7

On January 14th, Windows 7 reached its official "end-of-life," bringing an end to its updates as well as its ten years of poisoning education, invading privacy, and threatening user security. The end of Windows 7's lifecycle gives Microsoft the perfect opportunity to undo past wrongs, and to upcycle it instead.

We call on them to release it as free software, and give it to the community to study and improve. As there is already a precedent for releasing some core Windows utilities as free software, Microsoft has nothing to lose by liberating a version of their operating system that they themselves say has "reached its end."

Also at The Register and Wccftech.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Free Software Foundation Demands That Microsoft Release Windows 7 as Free Software | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 227 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday January 30 2020, @04:10PM (3 children)

    by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Thursday January 30 2020, @04:10PM (#951230) Journal

    End of life doesn't mean useless.

    End of life needs to mean end of copyright. Either support it or lose it. Simple

    No problem. YOU support it. Oh, you need the source code? No you don't. People have hacked binaries for decades. Oh, you want them to lose their copyrights? Why should this apply only to software? Why not books, movies, etc? Because even an out of print book can still be covered by copyright. Otherwise what's the intrinsic value of a limited edition printing?

    --
    SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday January 30 2020, @04:17PM (2 children)

    by tangomargarine (667) on Thursday January 30 2020, @04:17PM (#951240)

    Oh, you want them to lose their copyrights? Why should this apply only to software? Why not books, movies, etc?

    You know, back in the day before Disney, this is in fact what happened...remember that thing called the Public Domain?

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"

    • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday January 30 2020, @04:39PM (1 child)

      by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Thursday January 30 2020, @04:39PM (#951263) Journal
      Copyright got its' start in 1710, before Disney even existed. Before the US even existed. It wasn't needed much before then because written materials were expensive to reproduce, even with a printing press.
      --
      SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.

      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday January 30 2020, @08:06PM

        by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday January 30 2020, @08:06PM (#951381) Journal

        Copyright got its' start in 1710, before Disney even existed.

        Yes, with an acceptably short duration, not the insanity we have today. Disney's law [those are the people that wrote it along with Sonny Bono, then rubber stamped by our elected officials] is a contemptuous ass. Rodney Dangerfield deserves far more respect.

        --
        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..