On 01/09/08 15:30, Richard Stallman wrote: >> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Market >> >> "It is misleading to describe the users of free software, or the >> software users in general, as a "market". >> >> This is not to say we're against markets." > > If you want to see what we really say about this, visit that URL > and read the whole three paragraphs.
OK here are all paragraphs: > "Market" > > It is misleading to describe the users of free software, or the > software users in general, as a "market". If people exchange things it's about a market. Please don't try to change definitions like you do with "free". What you call "free software" has clearly =more= stings attached than you would suppose if you look up the word "free" in the dictionaries. The word "misleading" should be replaced by something like "against our beliefs". Please let the webmaster of the site fix that. No problem if he fixes the by L donated security problem first. > This is not to say we're against markets. If you try to change the meaning of words you are basically against something. You are =against= free software and =against= markets for software. Be honest! Didn't your parents told you so? > If you have a free > software support business, then you have clients, and you trade > with them in a market. Not according to GPLvX, if you supply a fix to GPL code you cannot trade it more than 1 time, all other possible clients have a free ride after that, that has nothing to do with a market. Please understand, I have no problems with it but I think programmers should have a free choice for each programming work(!!!!) they do. Let each client pay, let one client pay and give it away for the rest, etc. > As long as you respect their freedom, we wish you success in your market. He! When I use your definitions I get a parse error!!! What you call "freedom" is freedom with DRM", and everyone knows DRM spoils markets. Your wish for succes is clueless, meaningless, and perhaps plain evil. > But the free software movement is a social movement, not a > business, and the success it aims for is not a market success. Please get your facts straight with reality In practice the social thing doesn't count for the creators of free software. > We > are trying to serve the public by giving it freedom---not competing > to take them away from a rival. To equate this campaign for freedom > to a business' campaign for mere success is to diminish the > significance of freedom. All blurp, the only thing that real counts is code. Preferably functional elegantly written secure code and for outsiders preferable free, BSD licensed code, without the GNU GPLvX DRM. Can't you understand a programmer, for himself, prefers to start with BSD license? I presume this is a stupid question because Richard Stallman seems to have has a hole or something in his brain. That makes him loop the word "social" in all kind of ways but the words "emphatic" and "individual" are missing. I start believing Richard Stallmans brain is compiled by GCC. It behaves like what we see with OpenBSD copiled with GCC, someone has shot at it with a shotgun, few bit's on strange places are flipped. +++chefren
