"This show features an interview with Richard Stallman, founder of the free software movement and the man who put the GNU into GNU/Linux. After introducing the concept of free software, Richard offers some trenchant criticism of two tech superstars: the Lord of Linux, Linus Torvalds, and Apple guru Steve Jobs. From there, we move into a discussion of the impact of free software - and freedom more generally - on the evolution of personal and global consciousness."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-02-15
Stallman created the GPL which was designed to ensure that the users had all four "essential freedoms".
The GPL wasn't designed to ensure the "four freedoms."
The GPL predates the "four freedoms" which is a rationalization invented after the fact to defend the GPL.
The GPL was invented because of a personal feud between Richard Stallman and James Gosling over the ownership of changes to Emacs.
The irony is that the feud led Stallman to demand that anyone who added to Emacs give up their rights to their own code in order to see the addition included in his distribution.
Member since:2006-03-12
"The GPL wasn't designed to ensure the "four freedoms."
The GPL predates the "four freedoms" which is a rationalization invented after the fact to defend the GPL.
The GPL was invented because of a personal feud between Richard Stallman and James Gosling over the ownership of changes to Emacs.
The irony is that the feud led Stallman to demand that anyone who added to Emacs give up their rights to their own code in order to see the addition included in his distribution."
http://groups.google.com/group/net.micro/msg/0df9ab5ff21cc134?&hl=e...
"Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system software free, just like air."
"GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to restrict its further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all versions of GNU remain free. "
Edited 2007-02-05 02:43
Member since:2006-02-11
To inject some common sense into debates like these, before you erupt into a holy
war over licenses or GPL3 vs GPL vs LGPL ( is there a LGPL3 , anyone ) let's
take a look from the users perspective. People don't really care about licencese.
When you listen to some people talk , they take on such a self-righteous attitude
when it comes to license issues as if that is all there is. GPL isn't the answer to everything. It's an alternative and that is what is good about it.
Now RMS , i like him - not always - but the man has gumption , he can be self righteous at times and excessively exetreme,but it was as he is , that spearheaded this "revolution" , you sort of needed a guy like that at the beginning to galvanise differet similar efforts into a single purposeful response. Please , please , please don't get me wrong ,and don't take snippets out of my response and quote me out of context , licences are important ,but what i think is more important is that we have an ecosystem of different methods of ownership ,some are too restrictive and hopefully they will die out but they have every right to exist and make a move widespread adoption. So i think this is all good,but let's keep it in perspective ... :-)
Member since:
2006-11-26
If you're referring to the GPL, then that is true: Stallman created the GPL which was designed to ensure that the users had all four "essential freedoms". However, I object to your conclusion that RMS's first objective is forcing free software. He doesn't force anyone to use or develop free software. He hasn't used any law to force anyone into using free software. He hasn't implemented any technical means to force people into using free software. What he does force through the GPL is that if you redistribute somebody else's GPL'd software, you must give your recipient the exact same freedoms as what was given to you.