🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan5.022956.19008@husc3.harvard.edu> zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu writes:

   Well I hope you excuse me for not giving a diddly fuck for the FSF's
   goal, -- what you describe as freedom of all software, may be more
   felicitously described as FSF's *ownership* of all software under the
   terms of the GPL (read it).

No.  The FSF doesn't own all GPL'ed software (example: mine).  In a very
real sense, the software owns itself.

   My own personal goal is much more modest, being freedom for all
   men.  And until such time as thy wise up and abolish the shackles
   of private property, this goal includes their freedom to
   appropriate.  This is a freedom they are explicitly denied by the
   terms of the GPL.

Yup.  We also deny people the freedom to give up their freedom.  Is
this reasonable or not?

   As a programmer, I see no way to regard a program as free, unless I am
   at liberty to dispose of it as I see fit, whether by donating a copy
   to my batty uncle, or by turning it into a super-secret encryption
   routine.  By this standard, GNU is at least as proprietary as System V.

As a businessman, I cannot let my programs become proprietary; how could I
sell support for them if I can't get the source to modified versions?
If I did not use the GPL on my programs, I would be in the position
of funding my competitors.

   ME:
   >Your objection that this makes the GNU products not "free" is not
   >compelling.  For example, analogies have been made in this thread to
   >people's freedom; however, people's freedom is not without
   >restrictions -- consider stealing and killing, for example.
   
   Please do not be offended if I tell you that my intention is not to
   compel the masses, but merely to persuade those intelligent enough to
   understand my argument.  As always, the responsibility to demonstrate
   sufficient intelligence belongs to the recipient.  In this particular
   instance, you are not doing terribly well, as is evidenced by your
   remarkably unenlightening parallel between freedom of agents on one
   hand, and freedom of goods or information on the other.  I put it this
   way and leave it at that, so that you can vindicate yourself by figuring
   out the salient differences.

Ah.  Because you refuse to reflect on the similarities between
freedom of people and freedom of programs, you can thereby label such
comparisons unintelligent.  "I do not understand you; therefore you
are stupid."

   The GPL, so it is said, is intended to protect the rights of me, the
   user of GNU.  It should not come as a surprise that it does so by
   making restrictions of these very rights.  Why does it strike this
   blow against my rights? because the FSF needs to do it in order to
   protect my rights.

The purpose of the FSF is to transform software from a product into a
service.  To serve that end, the GPL must disallow the creation of a
software product.  The use of these means seems to mystify you.

   Even that would be personally satisfying: I shall have gone on
   record with my statement, and the pregnant silence of my
   interlocutor will bear most eloquent witness to the truth of my
   words.

RMS has gone on record saying that there is no point in trying to
convince people of the correctness of his ideas by the use of words.

But to continue with the personality thing: RMS is purported to whine.
If so, he chose a fellow whiner to start the FSF.

   Also, I believe that my use of language is perfectly unambiguous;
   however if you insist, I'll paraphrase it by stating that the GPL has
   the effect of automatically extending its scope to encompass any program
   which includes a fragment of code licensed under it, regardless of the
   size or ratio of such inclusion.

The legal doctrine of fair use of a copyright interferes with your
absolutist statement.

-russ <nelson@crynwr.com> What canst *thou* say?
Crynwr Software           Crynwr Software sells packet driver support.
11 Grant St.              315-268-1925 Voice  |  LPF member - ask me about
Potsdam, NY 13676         315-268-9201 FAX    |  the harm software patents do.