🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jan13.003932.19292@donau.et.tudelft.nl> reinoud@dutecai.et.tudelft.nl (;R. Lamberts) writes:
>From article <1992Jan11.120650.513@nntp.hut.fi>, by jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala):
>> It doesn't.  Finnish law and most countries' laws don't apply to
>> other nations.
>
>Right - but strangely enough many Americans seem to think US law
>applies to everyone on this earth (and to Martians, if they
>only knew how to apply it :-). (This remark is intended to catch
>the attention of right-wing FSF fanatics :-).

Consider yourself fortunite that you don't have US patent law. I'd gladly
ship you all our lawyers if you really want them...
>
>Also, a lot of Americans think laws about products are more important
>than the products themselves. If you think that's strange, have a
>look at an internet newsgroup called 'gnu.misc.discuss'. There you
>find a fine example of American political lobbying, under the cover
>of a seemingly innocent organization producing software that's almost
>free. Almost.

Thats because in order to make products we have to worry about keeping 
parasites away.
>
>HEY GUYS AND GALS, HAVEN'T YOU GOT ANYTHING BETTER TO DO THAN WHINING
>ABOUT LAW AND POLITICS? Why isn't this group discussing about
>wonderful new software that could be written? Or talking about
>new approaches to writing software?

This doesn't do much good once you lose the freedom to write software.
>
>Why is typical GNU software a remake of something that has been around
>for a long time, preferrably for decades already? Isn't the FSF in
>an ideal situation to try something new in software, not facing the
>risks of a commercial enterprise?
Not everyone has the money to afford what has been around for decades.
unix has gone up in cost not down, it doesn't matter how much free software
there is if you can't afford to use it.
>
>As far as I can tell, the FSF is not about writing good and free
>software. It's about how to annoy commercial enterprises who are trying
>to earn a living from fine software (more advanced and of better
>quality than the GNU stuff usually). It's about politics and lobbying.
At work I have a choice of using AT&T utilities or GNU utilities, I use
the Gnu utilities because they are better not because they are free.
>
>I'm not taking a position on whether the FSF political view is
>right or not. It seems just as silly as software patents to me.
>I just wished you were more concerned about writing great software
>than about legal and political stuff. When I first heard of the
>GNU project I thought I'd finally found a group of people serious
>about writing free software. Such a dissappointment.
What do you suggest GNU does? Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make the
problem go away, if you don't fight for your rights you will loose them. I am
glad that GNU is fighting for my right to write software without having to
hire a room full of lawyers.
>
>Oh well, I guess it's my European cultural background that's playing
>up ;-).
If US law continues to get more restrictive we may be joining you over
there....
>
>- Reinoud

Comment for all you anti GNU people:
I work part time for WPI, but also do consulting work. Free software is a
help not a hindrance, the availability of Linux means I will be able to work
in a real OS instead of MS-DROSS and EVENT-SCHEDULER 3.0. Given the choice
of working in MS-LOSS or spending a few weeks a year making a free OS better
what do you think I am going to do? 
I also see no problem with the new GNU library license and I am not about
to spend a cent for a commercial library just so I can deprive my customers
of the ability to modify software. 

-- 
Disclaimer: Opinions are based on logic rather than biblical "fact".   ------
Hackers do it for fun.  | First they came for the drug users, I said   \    /
"Profesionals" do it for money. | nothing, then they came for hackers,  \  /
Managers have others do it for them. | I said nothing... STOP W.O.D.     \/