[hn_acker]

Free software is not just about having the technical means to modify the software (access to the source code and not being impeded by technical measures against running modified versions instead of the original software) but also the legality to do so. Free software grants any users a legal right to modify it. That many users won't modify free software (because they lack the motivation/time/money/need) is not a strong argument against the usefulness of free software, because the users who would modify free software can do so without worrying about being sued. Additionally, the end users who won't modify free software can still benefit from the freedom because copyright is two-sided. Not only is it legal for people to modify free software, it's legal for end users to use other people's modifications of free software.

Free software is especially important in cases where the developers of proprietary devices use DRM as a secondary legal barrier (provided by 17 U.S. Code § 1201, section 1201 of the DMCA, in the US [1][2]) against otherwise non-infringing actions such as inspection (which is why access to source code remains a crucial requirement of free software alongside the freedom to modify) and repair. (Tangent: The EFF is arguing in Green v. Department of Justice that the anti-circumvention portions of DMCA 1201 violate the First Amendment [3].)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO_Copyright_and_Performance...

[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

[3] https://www.eff.org/cases/green-v-us-department-justice