Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

The FSF's Orwellian "Newspeak"

Author:Brett Glass
Posted:8/23/2000; 2:15:02 PM
Topic:Next survey: Are you an open source developer?
Msg #:19996 (In response to 19994)
Prev/Next:19995 / 19997

Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation, on their Web pages, frequently redefine words to suit their agenda. Among those words is "proprietary." Stallman calls any software which is licensed for money "proprietary," when in fact that word in common usage has a very different meaning. When we call hardware or software "proprietary," it means that it uses vendor-specific protocols, file formats, interfaces, and/or APIs -- which are often (though not always) undocumented by the vendor and may lock users into that vendor's products.

Commercial software is software which is "the subject of commerce" -- that is, which is licensed for money. GPLed software cannot be licensed for money and hence is not commercial.

As for the DFSG and the Open Source Definition: Anyone who states that they could include the GPL is being hypocritical. The entire purpose of the GPL is to discriminate against commercial programmers and software companies and to destroy their livelihoods.

Finally, the assertion which Stallman makes (and which you make again, above) that one can "close" the work of others is simply silly. If the source code to a program is published for all to see and use for free, and I create a derivative work, I can only keep my own code secret. The original is still available for anyone to see, just as before. I should be able to make money from my improvements, and to attempt to prevent me from being compensated for my efforts is spiteful and wrong. The GPL is, when you come down to it, all about spite.

--Brett Glass

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:11 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.