🚀 go-pugleaf

Charles Geyer writes:
>
>> Let me reiterate:  I regard the use of an inappropriate word, name-
>> ly "free," as deliberate misdirection on the order of "pro-abortion" for
>> "pro-choice" and "anti-choice" for "anti-abortion."  Most aren't really
>> fooled, but the gratuitous attempt at obfuscation can be very annoying,
>> perhaps indicative of a failure to fess up to the real issues at stake.
>
>Baloney.  I will concede that the "free" in FSF doesn't mean "free in the
>meaning preferred by Richard L. Goerwitz".  It probably doesn't mean "free
>in the meaning preferred by Ronald Regan, or John Scully, or Attilla the
>Hun."  Who cares?

I care.  Words are supposed to be used in ways that communicate accurately
intended meanings.  If it takes lots of additional explanation to get across
this intended meaning, then the original wording was misleading and/or poor-
ly constructed.  The question is whether it is really all that idiosyncratic
to think of freedom as implying a lack of restraint (either monetary, poli-
tical, legal, or otherwise).  Do you think that this notion is peculiarly
Goerwitzian?  If you do, then I'd have to conclude that you *have* in fact
been deceived by the very doublespeak that you say should never have confused
anyone.

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.  In fact it's much more than "unrestricted" software,
and does much more than prevent subsequent copyrighting or patenting of the
materials it's tacked onto.  Whether or not you buy the implied socioeconomic
system, it's there.  FSF code is anything but "free."  If if were truly free,
I would be able to put it into public domain packages, and not have to worry
about the thought police checking to see that I've included the license.

>I'll use [the word "free"] the way I like, thank you, and I expect others
>to do the same.

I'll use the word "free" in its usual sense, and only label things as free
when they are free in a sense every reasonable person will understand.  I'll
reserve the right to chide others who are - either premeditatedly or not -
less straightforward, as well.  (Even if I sympathize with their overall con-
cerns, and hope they have a balancing effect on the software industry.)

-- 

   -Richard L. Goerwitz              goer%sophist@uchicago.bitnet
   goer@sophist.uchicago.edu         rutgers!oddjob!gide!sophist!goer