Teemu Likonen <tliko...@iki.fi> writes: > Doug [2017-07-18 13:25:34-05] wrote: > > > My point is that most of the folks who complain about code not being > > free to modify are not capable of modifying it, so why do they > > complain? > > Free software has the advantage that it does not depend on just one > company and its interests. A free software community can maintain code > longer and can port it to different platforms. The community benefits > even if only some people actually modify the software.
By analogy: I am not capable of maintaining the house I live in, let alone of making significant improvements. Yet I benefit from the fact that anyone sufficiently motivated can learn to do so and they don't need permission from the people who made the house. If anyone who wanted to improve the house I live in were prevented from doing so without the express permission of the people who made the house, you're damned right I would complain. I may have no intention of ever doing so myself, but I want a wide-open market of people who can do so if I ask, who have learned because no law stops them from doing so. Free software includes that same freedom for software: Everyone is free to learn about it, and try to improve it, and share their work with others who want it. Because everyone has that freedom, we don't all have to exercise it. But we must defend it for everyone, and look with suspicion on anyone – even those who sell video cards – who tries to deny us that freedom. -- \ “All television is educational television. The question is: | `\ what is it teaching?” —Nicholas Johnson | _o__) | Ben Finney
