Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Sep 2005 22:40 UTC, submitted by Danijel Orsolic
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "This follow-up to the previously published article 'Ubuntu: Derivative or Fork?' takes into account most of everything that has been posted as a reaction to the first article to present a general opinion and compare them with facts derived from various resouces. You'll see that peace can be achieved between these two, and ultimately any GNU/Linux group out there."
Thread beginning with comment 37285
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: "Freedom"
by on Wed 28th Sep 2005 04:05 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: "Freedom""

Member since:

Stew, I think your beef is with the developer(s) of the software you would like to use for your application. They were the ones who chose the GPL, remember? The point of the GPL isn't to make life and work easier for you, it was to encourage open and rapid code exchange. Whining to the open source community about not being allowed to link someone else's code to the proprietary application you want is childish to say the least. Nobody owes you anything. If you want "the people" to enjoy your free plugins for commercial applications, write them yourself and place them under whatever license you see fit.

Welcome to life: you have to give a little to take a little.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: "Freedom"
by stew on Wed 28th Sep 2005 04:50 in reply to "RE[9]: "Freedom""
stew Member since:
2005-07-06

"stew, I think your beef is with the developer(s) of the software you would like to use for your application."

No, my beef is with using the word "freedom" for what is a collection of restrictions. "Freedom" is a moral word, a social word, maybe even a political. "Freedom" is something that is generally accepted as good.

Software and its licenses are not good or evil. They are not social, political or moral. Applying the word "freedom" to software doesn't make sense to me.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[11]: "Freedom"
by on Wed 28th Sep 2005 05:06 in reply to "RE[10]: "Freedom""
Member since:

Software and its licenses are not good or evil. They are not social, political or moral. Applying the word "freedom" to software doesn't make sense to me.

Stew, I know that I wont persuade you by saying this, but there is a whole lot of people who actually very much believe that software licenses are a social issue, starting from Free Software Foundation (http://www.fsf.org) to even Open Source Initiative (http://www.opensource.org) to alot of their followers including so many GNU/Linux users around.

Feel free to disagree, but rights and restrictions to your use of software are very much a social issue. Just think of where would this society be if everyone thought the way you do, if there was no Free Software movement in the first place. It would most likely be a Microsoft monopoly and it could have hardly turned out in any different way. In such a monopoly they would be the one controlling everything from government to the little man using his computer because nowadays practically whole world runs on computers and computer software. Their will be done, so to say. And if you think that there would always be someone coming up like Google today to threaten their monopoly think of the fact that even Google itself very much used Free Software to get where it is (GNU/Linux powered servers at the least).

So, if you think that such a monopoly has nothing to do with ethics, morality or even politics, then you must have been just teleported to this planet from who knows where and are yet to learn about Earthlings. It is exactly licenses like GNU GPL that have prevented this overwhealming monopoly to come to this fatal point and allow for freer development and use of software and information technology where millions have their say instead of just MS (and other corporations) employees.

And don't get me wrong. I'm not against corporations. I'm just against monopolies.

Thank you
Danijel

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[11]: "Freedom"
by archiesteel on Wed 28th Sep 2005 05:48 in reply to "RE[10]: "Freedom""
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Software and its licenses are not good or evil. They are not social, political or moral. Applying the word "freedom" to software doesn't make sense to me.

Perhaps, however the case could be argued that the prevalence of a certain economic model with regards to software has an economic impact, which in turns means that it has social and political effects as well.

Like it or not, almost everything we do has economical, social and political ramifications. This goes from putting gas in our cars to where we shop to what we eat.

As software becomes more and more present in our lives, so does its economic importance increases (not necessarily as a marketed product, by the way). Access to low-cost/free software is very important to developing economies, and that includes freedom from vendor lock-in.

I know many people are not interested in the political aspects of software licensing, but that doesn't meant that they don't exist...

Reply Parent Score: 1