[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FSF : lackeys of their corporate masters

From: Rui Miguel Seabra
Subject: Re: FSF : lackeys of their corporate masters
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 18:16:05 +0100

On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 08:22 -0700, Snuffelluffogus wrote:
> > We deal with Free Software here.
> One and the same.

No. freeware is the common term for proprietary software available for

Free Software is all software bound by a license that grants the user 4
  0) the freedom to run the program for any purpose
  1) the freedom to study the program and adapt it for the needs
  2) the freedom to distribute copies
  3) the freedom to publish modified versions

> If the source it open, people can find a way to get access to it for
> no money.

What do you mean by open? Access to code? Microsoft offers access to
some of their code under a Non Disclosure Agreement dubbed

Source code availablity is only one pre-condition for being Free
Software. You need access to source code in order to actually use
freedoms 1 and 3.

It is true that with Free Software there isn't a lot of incentive for
expensive amounts per copy (since others can redistribute it gratis), so
you base your income on what about 90% of the software market is:


> We

  ^^ Plural? Are you more than one? Or do you have dellusions of
grandeur and speak in plural referring to yourself?

> maintain your religious belief that "free" has to be redefined?
> That is a behavior typical of cultists.

We're not talking about zero price (gratis, also a meaning for free).
We're talking about *FREEDOM*. Freedom to exercise the above mentioned


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]