[u-u] license fragmentation [was: ethical objection to Zoom]

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| 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 
yet legislated.

| 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
| Google
| by patronizing companies like Baidu and Yandex that place fewer restrictions,
| and less manipulation on Canadians.

What Canadian censorship?  Child porn?  Other porn?  Copyright
enforcement?