When should we require that firmware be free?
Should buyers of modern hardware have a legal right to the firmware and source code that make their devices work, especially once vendors stop supporting them? Commenters weigh proposals ranging from mandatory open-source release at end-of-life or after a set support period, to escrowed source code for cloud-dependent products, while highlighting obstacles such as third‑party IP licenses, regulatory constraints (e.g. radio firmware), and support cost risks. Many see greater firmware openness as key to reducing e‑waste, enabling repairs and customisation, and curbing abusive lock‑in, but disagree on how far regulation can realistically go.
Scope of “Free Firmware”
- Views range from “always, by law” to more conditional:
- Mandatory freedom when devices are no longer manufactured or supported.
- When critical functionality depends on cloud/online services, or when taxpayer-funded.
- Some want it always available, others only after warranty or a paid “support registry” period ends.
- Middle-ground ideas:
- Require an open, minimal firmware/bootloader and hardware APIs, but allow proprietary “algorithms” on top.
- Allow vendors to keep code closed if they provide a supported path to install open replacements.
- Treat hardware schematics/docs as the minimum if firmware remains closed.
User Rights, E‑Waste, and Longevity
- Strong sentiment that buyers should be able to reflash and keep using hardware indefinitely.
- Many examples of otherwise-working devices bricked by abandoned firmware or servers (phones, consoles, smart TVs, baby monitors, DRM games).
- Some argue destroying usability should be considered damage to property; others note software is usually licensed, not owned.
Legal and Practical Obstacles
- Third‑party proprietary components, NDAs, patents, and radio regulations (e.g., baseband firmware) complicate forced open-sourcing.
- Disagreement on whether laws could simply override these constraints or would effectively ban much current hardware.
- Concerns about bankruptcy, SaaS-hosted repos, and lost source; proposals for source escrow with regulators or libraries.
- Debate over tying copyright protection to source release and shortening copyright terms.
Support, Warranty, and Abuse
- Manufacturers fear support/RMA costs from user-modified firmware and users lying to get replacements.
- Proposed mitigations: easy factory reset, explicit “software vs hardware” warranty separation, or physical actions that clearly void software warranty.
- Others argue modders are a tiny minority and their support impact is overstated.
Cloning, Competition, and Markets
- Open firmware can enable cheap hardware clones that undercut originals; examples from hobbyist electronics.
- Some say trademark law should handle counterfeits; others note practical unenforceability (e.g., dropshipping, China).
- Philosophical split between accepting cloning as normal competition vs viewing it as unfair exploitation.