🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #73018

Re: mailbox full (was Copyleft & royalties for authors)

#73018
From: Richard L. Goerwitz
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1991 01:41
41 lines
2803 bytes
>> In fact, copylefted software is heavily restricted, to the point of trying
>> to enforce upon me a specific way of handling software, and forcing me to get
>> others to do the same.
>
>Again so what?
>
>What's a "free man" someone who you can treat in an "unrestricted" fashion".
>Similarly for "free software".  It's software that can't be enslaved.

This is ludicrous.  Do we now disregard context as a viable guide to
meaning?  All the schoolboys online here have gotten out their dictionaries
and started quoting them to me completely out of context.

Today walk up to someone and say, "There is this foundation that writes
free software."  Ask him or her what is implied by that.  Ask what the plain
meaning is.  Invariably they'll say that it doesn't cost a cent.  Anything
beyond that lies in the realm of non-obvious meanings, and constitutes mis-
direction.

In the context of discussions of slavery, "free" has another meaning.  Ask
anyone on the street what a freed slave is, and he or she will give approx-
imately the same answer.  If you define a freed slave to be something other
than this, you jump into the realm of non-obvious meanings.

Why must I point out the obvious?  If it's not costless, then what is it?
Is it free in the sense of being freely usable or accessible?  Certainly
not.  You have to buy into the socioeconomic philosophy of the FSF, and tack
on the little license that insists every one else will, too.  There is no
latitude for people who might dare to differ in opinion, or who might just
like the idea of truly unrestricted software.  You eat it up, or you leave
it be.  Some freedom!

This is not freedom.  It's doublespeak.  Quote me all the secondary defini-
tions in the world, and it's not going to alter the plain sense of the word
in the context we're talking about.  That is, if we're using language to
communicate ideas, and not living in a Lewis Carroll fantasy.

-- 

   -Richard L. Goerwitz              goer%sophist@uchicago.bitnet
   goer@sophist.uchicago.edu         rutgers!oddjob!gide!sophist!goer
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1991Nov7.014105.23079@midway.uchicago.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!zeus.ieee.org!sdd.hp.com!wupost!uwm.edu!linac!midway!ellis!goer
References: <1991Nov6.175407.2243@cs.umn.edu> <1991Nov6.191536.8674@midway.uchicago.edu> <1991Nov6.215006.5060@cs.umn.edu>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,246c9c7ef4135c55
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1991-11-07 05:10:58 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!zeus.ieee.org!sdd.hp.com!wupost!uwm.edu!linac!midway!ellis!goer
From: goer@ellis.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: mailbox full (was Copyleft & royalties for authors)
Message-ID: <1991Nov7.014105.23079@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 7 Nov 91 01:41:05 GMT
References: <1991Nov6.175407.2243@cs.umn.edu> <1991Nov6.191536.8674@midway.uchicago.edu> <1991Nov6.215006.5060@cs.umn.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (NewsMistress)
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 41