Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 31st Aug 2007 19:24 UTC, submitted by Anonymous
FreeBSD The latest issue of the FreeBSD newsletter contains a letter from the Vice President of the FreeBSD Foundation about the GPLv3. "On June 29th, the Free Software Foundation unveiled version 3 of the GNU General Public license. Even though the majority of software included in the FreeBSD distribution is not covered by any version of the GPL, our community cannot ignore this very popular license or its most recent incarnation. Through extremely successful evangelization, and the popularity of Linux, the misconception that OpenSource and the GPL are synonymous has become pervasive."
Thread beginning with comment 267700
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Elmer FUD
by ulib on Sat 1st Sep 2007 16:47 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Elmer FUD"
ulib
Member since:
2005-07-07

By restricting only the right to take away freedom, yet removing all other restrictions, the GPL is trying to even the playing field.

If I buy a piece of closed-source software because it makes my life/work easier (and sometimes it happens; there's a lot of excellent open source software around, but there are cases in which you are better off with a commercial solution), you can repeat as much as you like that they're "taking away my freedom", or "abusing" me, it's still BS.
Reality is, people who would be glad to be able to prevent the developers from selling it to me - FSF says closed-source software is "immoral" (!) - are actually trying to take away my (and their) freedom.

In a totally free market, anybody has the right to lock you into they're solutions, especially in the software industry. Many countries have frameworks in place to curb such practices, and for good reason. If anybody has the right walk all over you, would you stick up for that right in the name of freedom?

This reveals an astounding lack of knowledge about fundamental economic issues, like the very definition of "free market".
Free market has nothing to do with abuse, or with people walking over other people. As a matter of fact, free market is possible only in a framework of justice that *prevents* abuse.
If a monopolist can adopt dirty techniques to prevent the raising of competitors, it means the market isn't completely free. If a vendor is allowed to play dirty tricks to lock in its customers, it means the market isn't completely free.

I strongly suggest you and the GPL proponents have a look at an excellent book, "Free to choose" by Nobel prize Milton Friedman. That would - hopefully - make you regain some touch with reality.


[Edit: typos]

Edited 2007-09-01 17:07

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: Elmer FUD
by SReilly on Sun 2nd Sep 2007 14:46 in reply to "RE[6]: Elmer FUD"
SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

...you can repeat as much as you like that they're "taking away my freedom", or "abusing" me, it's still BS.

You seem to, wrongly, think that I have some issue with closed source applications. Not only have I never stated such a thing, I regularly buy, and run, closed source apps.

Reality is, people who would be glad to be able to prevent the developers from selling it to me - FSF says closed-source software is "immoral" (!) - are actually trying to take away my (and their) freedom.

I don't have much time for hard liners and never have.

This reveals an astounding lack of knowledge about fundamental economic issues, like the very definition of "free market".
Free market has nothing to do with abuse, or with people walking over other people. As a matter of fact, free market is possible only in a framework of justice that *prevents* abuse.

You can keep repeating that line all you like but it won't make it any more true. I suggest you read up on basic market economics before you start trying to sell your opinions as fact.

If a monopolist can adopt dirty techniques to prevent the raising of competitors, it means the market isn't completely free. If a vendor is allowed to play dirty tricks to lock in its customers, it means the market isn't completely free.

The definition of a free market is where people have no restrictions on how they choose to do business, i.e. where there are no regulations in place to restrict them. This is common knowledge, to state otherwise is to show ones ignorance in such matters.

I strongly suggest you and the GPL proponents have a look at an excellent book, "Free to choose" by Nobel prize Milton Friedman. That would - hopefully - make you regain some touch with reality.

I strongly suggest you take some lessons in economics before you start running at the mouth. That way, next time you might avoid embarrassment.
Further more, if you had been less condescending and more willing to present your ideas in a less aggressive manner, I would not have to kick your post in the teeth.

Next time, please try and be a bit more civil. Maybe then I wont feel the need to belittle you so much. you would also be presenting yourself as less of an asshole.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[8]: Elmer FUD
by cyclops on Sun 2nd Sep 2007 14:58 in reply to "RE[7]: Elmer FUD"
cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

"I strongly suggest you take some lessons in economics before you start running at the mouth."

Ignoring the arguments which are poor. If you are talking economics Monopolies are really really bad. I'm sure if you were even aware of the basics you would know how bad.

Now as for abusing a monopoly well...

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[7]: Elmer FUD
by TheBadger on Wed 5th Sep 2007 21:16 in reply to "RE[6]: Elmer FUD"
TheBadger Member since:
2005-11-14

If I buy a piece of closed-source software because it makes my life/work easier [...] you can repeat as much as you like that they're "taking away my freedom", or "abusing" me, it's still BS.


In a few years time when you've quite possibly lost the ability to run that software on contemporary hardware, and presumably aren't allowed to run it legally under emulation (if any emulator has been developed), you might see how much freedom you're left with.

And this isn't a hypothetical situation: it has happened to many people already. Of course, if reverse engineering binaries and proprietary file formats is some kind of sport for you, with increased excitement when it's valuable stuff you're trying to recover in the data produced by those programs, perhaps giving up some of those freedoms is part of the fun. It generally isn't fun for everyone else.

Reply Parent Score: 1