Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 14:54:24 -0600 (CST) From: "Kenneth P. Stox" <stox@imagescape.com> To: Jeremiah Gowdy <data@irev.net> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ONTOPIC - FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT - Not a bunch of Message-ID: <XFMail.010107145424.stox@imagescape.com> In-Reply-To: <001701c078e0$2dd587f0$aa240018@cx443070b>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
First of all, I have changed the CC: to -advocacy, this does NOT belong in
-hackers. My apologies to all for not doing so at the beginning.
On 07-Jan-01 Jeremiah Gowdy wrote:
> What do you think the average person would interpret "free software" as ?
> Software that's not opressed, or software that has no cost ? Give me a
> break.
I live in a "free" country ( Please, let us not get into a political debate
about this statement ). Does that mean it is without cost ? I don't think so,
living in a "free" country has enormous cost, the least of which involves the
IRS.
> If I may repeat what you just said again:
>
>> If I must perform other actions as a result of my modifications, it is not
>> "free." I am being compelled to perform. This is not "free."
> a.. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice,
> this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
>
> b.. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
> notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
> documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
>
> Those sure seem to be compulsions. They are small and simple, but they are
> compulsions. So even BSD licenced software is not truly "free software" by
> your foolish definitions.
Yes, I guess I am a fool for actually being capable of using a dictionary. From
the numerous mispellings in your postings, it does seem that you are incapable
of doing so. My "foolish" definitions are the same used by Richard Stallman and
Eric S. Raymond. Your definition is consistent with the the one used by MSN,
$400 free when you agree to spend $24.95/month for three years. I can't help it
if your understanding of the language is defined by Madison Avenue.
>
> X11
>
> and this permission notice appear in all copies of
> the Software and that both the above copyright notice(s) and this
> permission notice appear in supporting documentation
>
> X11 has the same restrictions. Although including the licence in future
> copies is no big thing, it's still a restriction, and by your own words: "If
> I must perform other actions as a result of my modifications, it is not
> 'free'".
>
> Now lets hear you rephrase your words to try to become less ambigous about
> the definition of "free" and how it interacts with the restrictions of the
> BSD and/or X11 licences. Maybe you can tell us how they are "more free".
> That's always fun, to listen to people rant about levels of "freeness".
Arguably, these clauses have become anachronisms, since they were created prior
to the United States joining the Bern Convention. They are restrictions, but
they preserve the freedoms of the authors and prevent others from siezing
rights to the code. These clauses do not limit the user's freedom in using a
distributing the code/binaries, they just insure that the originating authors
do not lose freedom at the same time. Prior to joing the Bern convention, if
this clauses were not asserted, someone could make minor changes to the code
and claim it as their own. Back to definitions again:
1. Exempt from subjection to the will of others; not under
restraint, control, or compulsion; able to follow one's
own impulses, desires, or inclinations; determining one's
own course of action; not dependent; at liberty.
"Free" does not allow you to impose your restraint, control, or compulsion on
others. This is a delicate balancing act that is the key thesis of what is
really "free." It is this balancing act that most forget in debates over the
meaning of "free," without this balance you have anarchy. Without this balance
I would be free to kill, steal, and rape. Obviously, in a "free" society, I am
not "free" to commit these acts.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.010107145424.stox>