Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ogicse!emory!mephisto!ukma!sean From: sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: What does "free" mean, eh? (Re: Scareware and philanthropy) Message-ID: <14610@s.ms.uky.edu> Date: 19 Mar 90 18:05:47 GMT References: <1142@mtxinu.UUCP> <306@isgtec.UUCP> <852.25ff8253@ccvax.ucd.ie> Organization: The Leaning Tower of Patterson Office @ The Univ. of KY Lines: 37 b_haughey@ccvax.ucd.ie (Brian J Haughey) writes: |People misunderstand the purpose of the FSF - it exists so that ordinary |users can have the benefit of decent software (often better than commerecial |products) at a nominal cost. People like you obviously don't appreciate |this principle. Fine. But don't attack the FSF because of it. I doubt if anyone here misunderstands the purpose of FSF. That purpose is twofold: 1. To provide source code access to their utilities. 2. To prevent anyone from incorporating FSF code into a distribution who does not wish to also provide the same level access to the rest of that distribution. The gripe most people have is with #2. Lots of people have different ideas about distribution restrictions. FSF code isn't actually "free", because before you can distribute it, you have to compromise your own code. Sorry folks, but that means FSFware isn't free. It means FSFware is a tool for pushing their political view on how software should be distributed. "Free" would mean they have room for other views, but they don't. My copyright is less restrictive than theirs, but I can't use it if I wish to incorporate their code. If FSFware were free, it wouldn't require other code to conform to their copyright, and therefore their political views. "Freedom" means room for diversity of thought and opinion, not one way to do everything. Sean -- *** Sean Casey sean@ms.uky.edu, sean@ukma.bitnet, ukma!sean *** "Well, heck's farr, Jim, it gives mah computer sumthin' to do when *** Ah'm out brandin' capacitors." -DM