🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ZsiNgB9w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (From A to B) writes:
>When I say that the alternative is to let hoarders do things their way but
>not give them any assistance, I mean you let them do what they like with
>free software, but you don't yourself spend any time assisting them.  You
>don't stop them doing anything they want to do themselves, you just don't
>spend time helping them.  You continue to spend time helping other people,
>and it's inevitable that some of that help will be of assistance to the
>hoarders AS WELL.

The only "assistance" the FSF makes available is the permission to copy,
use, and redistribute their software (and derivatives).  Thus, in order to
give the hoarders less assistance, they have to do less than this.
Software hoarders can still copy and use FSF software, but they can't
redistribute it (or derivatives) in a restrictive way.

Since the goal of the FSF is to discourage software hoarding, this makes
sense.

If the FSF had a larger menu of services then perhaps they could provide
less assistance in a different way.  But if their only service is providing
a software source, there's not much less they can do.  By virtue of the
nature of their software sharing philosophy, they can't prevent software
hoarders from acquiring their software, but they can prohibit them from
redistributing it in hoardish ways.

-- 
Barry Margolin
System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar