[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Matt Assay Tells the Truth

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: Matt Assay Tells the Truth
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:24:23 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

Rjack wrote:
explain to them that their definition of "freedom" is wrong.

The FSF explains at length what they mean by free software.
It is spelled out clearly in the GPL as well. The only people
adversely affected by restrictions on what may be done with
free software are developers who wish to restrict the freedom
of their users. Those people would not be any happier if free
software were named something else. It is no different than
freedom of speech being surrounded by a web of restrictions
concerning slander, libel, obscenity, or national emergency.
Reasonable people understand. People who resort to dictionary
definitions in the belief that this makes a cogent point are
to be pitied.

Perhaps after they change their definition to suit Stallman's
philosophy you'll have a better chance of making all of us ardent

No one is trying to make you be anything. No one is forcing you
to develop software, and if you do develop software, no one is
forcing you to adopt a particular license. The GPL creates a
community of code developed by people who share the belief that
users should have the freedom to run, read, modify, and share
software. That code may be incorporated into other software only
if that other software is under the same license. Simply choose
not to do so if that is what you wish. The GPL community will
happily ignore you, and you may happily ignore them.

My God! However did society ever manage before Stallman came along?
We're so grateful he's saving us from ourselves.

Do you really find it so peculiar and upsetting that some
people have different points of view than you do? You must
live a very insular existence.

Except file bogus lawsuits in attempts to intimidate folks into
believing the GPL is an enforceable legal contract.

And successful ones at that. Even assuming that your arguments
about the GPL not being enforceable are correct, which they are
not, the GPL clearly expresses the intent of the developers who
use it. Why are we to feel sympathy for people who disregard this

Upset? I don't have to file bogus copyright lawsuits to concisely
express my views. That fact leaves me at peace.

After each suit filed by the SFLC, the GPLed software was made properly
available by the defendants or their agents. That leaves me at peace.
Good. I'm glad we're both happy.

reply via email to

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