From kragen@dnaco.net Sun Sep 13 15:25:02 1998 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:25:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Kragen To: "Bradley M. Kuhn" cc: clug-user@clug.org Subject: Re: some defense of the ethics of free software (was Re: free solaris) In-Reply-To: <19980913145346.Y2706@ebb.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Keywords: X-UID: 1878 Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 13 Sep 1998, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote: > Thus spoke Kragen: > > On Sun, 13 Sep 1998, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote: > > > Thus spoke Kragen: > > > > Well, there's also the ability to extort enough money from users to make a > > > > living. This is different from hoarding money, IMHO, and it's what the > > > > copyright laws are intended to promote. > > > > > > You can still "extort" such money with free software, in a variety of ways. > > > Lots of free software companies are making good profits and paying people. > > > > They can't extort money with copyright law. > > I guess I misunderstood what you were saying then. What did you mean? Copyright law gives makers of proprietary software the means to extort money from users with the intent of either hoarding money or using it (for example, to make a living). Free software takes away the ability of its makers to use copyright law to extort money from users (well, almost.) whether their intent is to hoard money or to make a living. > > > > We'd better find a good way to deal with software-like things, and as far > > > > as I can tell, free software is the only sane way to do that yet. > > > > > > Hey, sounds like I have a convert. :) > > > Nope. I've believed this since before I met you. :) > > So, you are a free software zealot. The truth comes out. :) > > Why is it, then, that you prefer the LGPL over the GPL? Because I believe that use of the LGPL, or similar licenses, tends to promote the use of free software. Because I believe that using a program through RPC or through talking to it through sockets is really the same thing as using a program by calling its functions directly. > > Quite serious. Think of the consequences if nanotech comes of age in a > > society dominated by intellectual-property restrictions. > > I agree completely. I just get flamed *hard* when I compare non-free > software to slavery. I think they are akin to each other, but I have been > flamed recently on two different mailing list for making this comparison. > At least, now, on this list, I am one of two people who have made this > comparison. I don't think non-free software is comparable to slavery. I think that, if it remains dominant, it will *result* in slavery, which is something else entirely. There are those people who would claim that Christians' belief in the rightness of Christianity, and its all-importance, is akin to slavery. I am not one of them. But it was unquestionably a significant factor in making slavery possible in America, because it provided a moral justification that let people believe slavery was right, and led to the more general racist justification: "for their own good". Kragen (who has been occasionally in the way of other people's anger about slavery, and who would never go so far as to compare having to use non-free software to slavery) -- Kragen Sitaker The sages do not believe that making no mistakes is a blessing. They believe, rather, that the great virtue of man lies in his ability to correct his mistakes and continually make a new man of himself. -- Wang Yang-Ming