Xref: utzoo gnu.g++.help:402 comp.lang.c++:11355
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!AI.MIT.EDU!microsoft!jimad
From: microsoft!jimad@AI.MIT.EDU (Jim ADCOCK)
Newsgroups: gnu.g++.help,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: LGPL
Message-ID: <34@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 22 Jan 91 19:18:29 GMT
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Reply-To: microsoft!jimad@ai.mit.edu (Jim ADCOCK)
Followup-To: gnu.g++.help
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 53

In article <9101161825.AA09469@mole.ai.mit.edu| rms@AI.MIT.EDU (Richard Stallman) writes:

|The purpose of the GNU project is not maximizing the use of GNU
|software.  It is promoting the freedom to share and change software as
|much as we can.  Having more users is better, all else being equal,
|but not at the cost of forgetting what we are about.

Perhaps Stallman needs to place a "clear statement" about what GNU is about
in your licensing agreements, and in your statements about "freedom"
so people will not be confused by the difference between your actual
goals, and some of your more casual statements.

|It seems that the GNU libraries will have enough use under the terms
|now proposed to make them thrive.  Even if that's only 25% as much as
|they would otherwise be used, that is not a serious problem for the
|GNU project.

You contradict yourself in two paragraphs.  You state that GNU is 
attempting to promote the freedom to share and change software --
but not maximize the use of that software.  You state that the 
present licenses only allow perhaps 25% of the people to use GNU-restricted
software, and do not consider that a serious problem.

I disagree.  I believe any software offering that deliberately 
prohibits the majority of programmers from using it is divisive, and
against the good of the software community.  Programmers -- please do 
not allow your software to be used for such divisive ends -- please do
not allow your software to be distributed under the GNU licensing 
restrictions.

|Pacifism is not part of the GNU philosophy, and software hoarding is
|not a victimless crime.  Being a wimp is not my idea of "high
|mindedness".  'nuff said.

This again, seems to be a statement that the ends justify the means.  
I disagree.  People use the "ends justify the means" argument to 
try to justify whatever set of beliefs they believe in.  The end result
is that other human beings are injured.  Gnu software itself engages
in software hoarding -- justifying that behavior in terms of trying
to force others to conform to their "political" ideals.

I can tolerate such behavior if it isolated.  But when Stallman refers
to such behavior as "freedom" I must speak out and disagree.  Attempts
to coerce people do not represent freedom.  "Freedom" is letting people
decide for themselves.  The Gnu software is in no way "free" but is
as restrictive if not more restrictive that software available from
other more traditional companies.  Please do not be deceived 
by Stallman's attempts to label his actions "freedom."   Please do not
allow Stallman's licenses to be applied to your software -- doing so 
does not make your software more accessible to most software programmers,
but rather prevents most software programmers from using your creations.

[more than standard disclaimer]