Path: utzoo!telly!philmtl!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!think!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ibmchs!auschs!d75!cello!ranger.austin.ibm.com!jat
From: jat@ranger.austin.ibm.com (John Tamplin)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Stallman's attitude
Message-ID: <3078@cello.UUCP>
Date: 7 Dec 89 16:54:33 GMT
References: <8041@stiatl.UUCP>
Sender: news@cello.UUCP
Lines: 29

In article <8041@stiatl.UUCP> meo@stiatl.UUCP (Miles O'Neal) writes:
>Why should software be free? Why not hardware? Cars? Telephone calls?
>TV? Money? Or anything and everyhting else? Why shouldn't all food be
>a labor of love? Are farmers mass murderers for not giving away their
>crops because someone out there is hungry?

Software is a manifestation of knowledge.  The utility of software to
a person is not diminished by another also having the software.  TV is
a case where the public doesn't pay for it -- advertisers who like what
the product (the movie, event, etc) represents and the audience it reaches
subisidize the program.  Software can work the same way.  All of the other
examples you gave cost the provider to provide more.  

>Mr. Stallman has declared legal war on everyone who writes software
>and thinks they should be able to charge for it, but I have yet to
>see the justification for this. There may be some - I'm just saying
>I haven't seen it.

Legal war?  All FSF is doing is promoting their own ideas and backing them
up with action.  If you think this is war, then so is every aspect of the
free market.  The market will decide which idea will survive.  If nobody
agrees with FSF and decides not to use their products, it will go away.
If nobody wants to pay outrageous prices for commercial software, they will
have to change or they will go away.

>-Miles O'Neal
>{yr fave backbone here}!emory!stiatl!meo

John Tamplin