[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: "The Free software Movement is a Scam" -Alfred Szmidt

Subject: Re: "The Free software Movement is a Scam" -Alfred Szmidt
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 14:43:34 -0500
User-agent: slrn/ (Debian)

On 2005-10-14, Karen Hill <> wrote:
> Bobbie Gill wrote:
>> Karen Hill wrote:
>> > I checked my inbox and look what I found:
>> >
>> >
>> > From:      "Alfred M. Szmidt" <>
>> > To:        "Karen Hill" <>
>> > CC:
>> > Subject:    Re: Linus CHARGING $5,000 to use Linux name!!!!!
>> > Date:       Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:56:53 +0200
>> >
>> > The free software movement is a scam.
>> >
>> > The Free software movement is about freedom, not price.  Charging
>> > money for a copy of a program is perfectly OK, and has always been.
>> >
>> Yeah, sometime when I check my inbox I get invitations to re-input my
>> personal information for my ebay account (never have had an ebay
>> account, but I guess the phishers don't care). I also seem to win quite
>> a few lotteries in the U.K. And I've also been solicited to help some
>> poor chap get his father's millions out of Nigeria.
>> The point I'm trying to make is that there often is quite a bit of B.S.
>> to be found in the typical inbox.
> Except this is the real deal.  I have the headers to prove it (If you
> press me I will post the message with the headers).   He responded to
> me privately by email in response to a usenet post I made about Linus
> charging 5 grand to use the linux name.  Alfred's  point I guess is

        Here is where you lose it. Both this trademark anti-dillution 
scheme (call a spade a spade afterall) and the original GPL don't ever
create burdens on mere use. Never had, never will. What they create 
"burdens" on are entities that want to take someone else's work and 
present it as their own.

        Both the trademark license and the derivative works terms of
the GPL are entirely IRRELEVANT to end users.

> that the source code is important and the freedom to modify it and not
> the price of that source code.  But here is that catch...what good is
> freedom if I can't afford it?  Isn't non-free software that I can use
> MORE important than expensive GPL software like Redhat Linux?
> A box license from MS is a one time purchase for a reasonable price,
> redhat you must pay every year.  MS gives you security updates via

        No you dont. This is what Mandrake, CentOS and Whitebox Linux
are all about.

> windows update for free.  Not so with Linux in terms of redhat.  Like I
> said before what good is freedom if I can't afford it?

        What good is an argument if it is a weak lie?

Apple: Because a large harddrive is for power users.
                                                                 / | \

reply via email to

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