Re: Will NVDA ever be discontinued?

Quentin Christensen

Just to throw an official comment in on some of the protections we have in place around this:

While NVDA is (and will remain) open source, the official version is maintained and updated by NV Access Limited.  We are a charity registered in Australia and overseen by a board of directors,  Even if a legitimate offer was made to purchase NVDA, it would need to be approved by the board, so it is not just a matter of Mick as the founder, making a decision.  From:

Statement of Purpose
The purpose of NV Access is to lower the economic and social barriers associated with accessing Information Technology for people who are Blind or Vision Impaired. The company is thus dedicated to the ideal that accessibility and equitable access is a right and should not come as an extra cost to a person who is Blind or Vision Impaired. In a world where information and technology are an increasingly important part of daily living, this ideal facilitates greater participation and independence in all facets of life , most importantly within the areas of education and obtaining employment. In order to carry out this purpose, the company’s objectives include, but are not limited to: 

1. To facilitate the development of open-source assistive technologies for blind and vision impaired people that are free of charge to the end user.
2. To provide low cost information technology solutions which enhance accessibility for blind and vision impaired people.
3. To act as a fundraising body to support the various projects encompassed by the organisation.
4. To encourage and facilitate contributions to the overall effort of the organisation.
5. To contribute to existing and future efforts aimed at improving accessibility for blind and vision impaired people.
6. To raise awareness and promote the importance of accessibility.

It is unlikely that *any* buy out offer could satisfy all or even most of those statements therefore it would be next to impossible to justify a vote in favour of a buy out.

The core NV Access staff (such as myself) are paid, and yes, we could leave in the future (note: I certainly don't have any intention of leaving, I'm very happy at NV Access!) - our structure ensures that either the remaining staff, or the board, would be in a position to hire new staff as required.

And if for some reason, the entire board and organisation left, the code, at the end of the day, is still open source.  And it relies on other code which is also open source, so it would be very tricky to try to pick that apart to sort out licensing for each part - as it is, we've been asked about changing elements of the license previously and due to a range of factors changing it is generally almost impossible.

Kind regards


On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 5:25 AM Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 02:14 PM, JM Casey wrote:
But it certainly could happen, and the “what’s new” logs never explain in great detail about holes that might have been patched, or how accessibility API might have been used to exploit vulnerabilities.
And in almost all cases, that's by intent.  There remains at least some value to what used to be called "security by obscurity."  That's harder to maintain these days, though, with the bodies out there that log virtually every vulnerability in any piece of software in existence once they're found, assign them designations and severity levels, so that they can be consulted by development entities that may not even know about these yet themselves.

But there is a resistance to trumpeting which vulnerabilities have been patched since that means that someone who might exploit them in unpatched software will still not necessarily know what those were to begin with.

Brian - Windows 10, 64-Bit, Version 21H2, Build 19044

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.

   ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

Quentin Christensen
Training and Support Manager

Join to automatically receive all group messages.