🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <00jt6i99gC@herkules.sssab.se>, matoh@sssab.se (Mats Ohrman) writes:
> rhealey@kas.helios.mn.org (Rob Healey) writes:
> >	Apple, Lotus and others practice legal terrorism, i.e. they
> >	intimidate innovators by threatening law suits. It is VERY
> >	appropriate to compare Apple to terrorists because Apple
> >	IS a terrorist organization, they just use legal treats rather
> >	than guns or nerve gas.
> 
> 
> Once upon a time, I thought FSF was a Pretty Neat Thing, and thought
> that they had a good goal. During the years, however, statements like
> this has totally eroded the credibilty of GNU in my eyes. Now, no
> matter how worthy the "Cause", the kind of people that "tag along" and
> "rise up to defend the Cause" just doesn't make it worth it.

Has the FSF said `Apple, Lotus and others practice legal terrorism,'
or was this said by someone else? Where can you cite an official
source on such an extreme statement?

As somebody said here already, the FSF officials rarely post in g.m.d.

Perhaps you should start distinguishing between the FSF and Rob
Healey (et.al.)? Would be nice and would perhaps put the discussion
back from the insult level it has reached now.

Btw, I agree that terrorism is a bad term in this concept. I also
agree that all the people who complained here should just start
writing better free software. Then we would get rid of either the GPL
(yes, _just_ write better software ;-) or of commercial software
without source (yes, _just_ write better software ;-), depending on
your personal notion of `free.' Talking is easier than creating
better work, n'est pas? A lot of the commercial/GNU/PD software I use
daily would need that work :-(

--
Joachim
Darmstadt, Germany
<schrod@iti.informatik.th-darmstadt.de>