bofh wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 7:11 PM, Chris Zakelj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How, pray tell, would purchasing and using this software reduce my
freedom, given that not only does it allow me to make money doing
something I find fun, but also enjoy summer weekends in the sun
watchings kids have fun, too?
Come now, there are serious questions about whether Richards line in
the sand is in the correct place, but this question is silly. He's
not talking about your personal freedom, he's talking about end user's
freedom. GPL is about the end user's freedom. BSD is about the
developer's freedom. The two does not have to meet.
This is why there's such a big deal over OOXML right now.
No, this is exactly on point. As I understand his view, Richard seems
to think that any software licensed under a schema that doesn't meet his
definition of "free" is bad/unethical/whatever, and for an OS to support
said software, even if only by reference, is not only also bad, but also
diminishes my own freedom. I fail to see how using a software package
(remember, *I* would be the end user here), proprietary and
license-restricted though it may be, somehow causes a loss in my
freedom. I am free to (not) use/purchase such software as I see fit,
and don't understand why forking over some cash would somehow result in
my losing something, when in my mind, I'm actually coming out ahead.
Would I love to see a BSD/ISC/GPL/(insert free license here)
equivalent? You bet. But I won't give up relaxing weekends just to
make a political statement.
