Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : Richard Heathfield
Date : Sat Sep 17 2005 01:12 am

Joe Butler said:

> 
> I can
> now clearly see that the proponents of free software seem a bit
> overzealous.

Not all of them.

Look, it's really simple. A programmer writes a program. He now has a choice 
- sell it, or give it away. That's HIS CHOICE. Sometimes, I choose to give 
software away. Other times, I might prefer to sell it. That's my choice. 
The product provider chooses whether to charge for his product.

> I'm now wondering if there is, say, some connection between Stalman and
> Microsoft - and that the open source movement is simply Stalman's attempt
> to get even with them.

No, he phoned up a site where he used to work, spoke to an ex-colleague, and 
asked him to send over some source code (which Stallman had in fact worked 
on), and the request was refused. This took Stallman aback somewhat. He 
simply wasn't expecting that reaction*.

Then it sort of got out of hand, and GNU was the result. :-)

Hats off to RMS for sticking to his guns on this. I think he himself is a 
bit overzealous, but somebody has to be! I prefer a more laid-back approach 
myself.



* You have to remember that this was back in 8-bit micro days, or possibly 
before; software was not the huge business it is now. Undoubtedly programs 
were bought and sold, but one didn't necessarily immediately associate 
"program" with "sales opportunity" in those days.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/2005
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain

.